Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2006

The Board has determined that there is no current evidence of a low back disability and the veteran's claim for service connection for low back strain is denied.

The Board has determined that additional evidence is needed to fully and fairly consider the veteran's claims, including medical records from VA facilities and any relevant lay statements. The case will be returned to the RO for further action.

The veteran seeks an increased rating for his service-connected lumbosacral strain, which is currently rated at 20 percent. The case has been remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and additional medical records.

The Board has determined that additional medical examinations are needed to clarify the relationship between the veteran's service-connected pes planus and his claimed disabilities, including bilateral ankle, knee, hip conditions, and degenerative joint and disc disease of the lumbar spine.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence in previous denials and needs further development of records.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining records from 1971 to 1991 and arranging for a VA examination.

The Board found that the veteran's low back disability is a congenital defect and not incurred or aggravated by service. The claim for an increased rating for PTSD was also denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran's skin disorder and back disorder are not related to his military service. The claims for bilateral hearing loss were also denied.

The veteran's degenerative disc disease of the lumbar spine is currently rated at 20 percent, and the evidence does not support a higher rating.

The Board has determined that a 40 percent disability rating is warranted for the veteran's service-connected lumbar spine degenerative disc disease, effective from the date of the initial grant of service connection.

The veteran's low back disability is manifested by limitation of motion that does not more nearly approximate moderate than slight, and the combined range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine is greater than 120 degrees. The veteran is therefore entitled to a 10 percent rating for his low back disability.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his low back disability was denied. The RO assigned a 40 percent disability rating, effective January 29, 2002.

The Board found no evidence of a link between the claimed conditions and service, thus denying all claims for service connection.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for a higher initial rating for low back disability and service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder (claimed as bipolar disorder) due to incomplete development of evidence, including failure to provide notice of revised rating criteria and additional VA examination. The veteran is also required to submit any pertinent evidence in his possession.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased rating and service connection, finding that his hip and pelvic injuries did not warrant a higher rating or service connection based on exposure to environmental hazards. The lumbar spine disorder was found to be unrelated to service.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including separate neurological and orthopedic examinations to determine the severity of his service-connected lumbar spine disability and its manifestations. The case will be reviewed again by the AMC based on the additional evidence.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for low back, right knee, left knee, and depressive disorders due to lack of current diagnoses and insufficient evidence linking these conditions to military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current lumbar spine disability, including degenerative disc disease, is related to his service injury. Therefore, the claim for service connection is granted.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination and consideration of extraschedular considerations.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to issues related to service connection and new evidence.