Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2006

The Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the veteran's claim for service connection for a low back condition, as there is no competent medical evidence linking any current low back condition to service.

The veteran's claim for service connection for thoracic kyphosis and thoracolumbar scoliosis was previously denied in July 1977. The evidence received since that decision does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. Service connection for hernias as secondary to thoracic kyphosis and thoracolumbar scoliosis is also denied.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and scheduling a VA examination to determine the etiology of any anal fissure and/or back disability.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain additional medical evidence and for the veteran to undergo an orthopedic examination. The claim will be adjudicated again after these actions.

The Board has determined that there is no current evidence of a chronic low back or left hip disability, and thus service connection cannot be established for these conditions.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for service connection due to incomplete information and need for additional examinations.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient development of evidence regarding frequency and length of incapacitating episodes, and for additional medical examination.

The veteran's cervical spine disorder is rated at 30 percent effective August 5, 2005. The right knee disorder is rated at 20 percent effective August 5, 2005.

The Board has determined that the veteran's low back disability does not warrant a rating in excess of 20 percent, and his right knee and left knee disabilities do not meet the criteria for higher ratings under the applicable diagnostic codes.

The veteran's back condition is rated at 60% due to pronounced intervertebral disc syndrome with significant symptoms.,The veteran's left knee condition remains at 20%, as the evidence does not support a higher rating.,The veteran's fused left ankle and residuals are rated at 20%, with no further increase.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not preclude employment consistent with his education and occupational experience.

The veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for a back disability is being remanded due to procedural issues, including the need for an initial rating decision and proper notice.

The Board found no evidence to support the veteran's claim of service connection for a back disability. For PTSD, the Board denied an initial rating in excess of 10 percent from October 9, 1992, through March 24, 2005.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including a VA examination and consideration of additional evidence submitted by the veteran.

The Board has determined that the appellant's low back condition, including arthritis, was not incurred or aggravated during active military service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the submitted evidence does not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for service connection for a low back disorder.

The Board has granted service connection for a low back disorder, but denied service connection for an eye disorder due to lack of evidence linking the current conditions to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his low back disorder, finding that the evidence did not support a higher evaluation based on intervertebral disc syndrome or other criteria.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current diagnosis of arthritis or other conditions claimed, and therefore cannot establish service connection for these issues. The claims are denied.

The VA granted service connection for the veteran's lumbar strain with degenerative arthritis, sacroiliac joint and assigned a 20 percent disability rating effective June 6, 2003. The veteran's appeal is about whether this initial evaluation should be higher.