Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2008

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) because there was no evidence of a formal or informal claim for TDIU prior to August 28, 2003. The effective date remains May 20, 2002.

The Board denied the appellant's claims for service connection for dermatitis, right knee disorder, and low back disorder. The decision also addressed his increased rating claims for left knee degenerative joint disease and dislocation disability but did not assign a specific evaluation.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development of the medical records and notification regarding secondary service connection.

The Board denied service connection for a disorder of the lumbar spine, finding that it was a congenital defect. The claim for an increased evaluation for major depressive disorder was granted with a 50% rating effective from March 29, 2005.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further evaluation and consideration of his claim for an increased rating for lumbar strain.

The Board found that the objective medical evidence did not establish a nexus or link between any current low back disability and any incident of the veteran's active service, thus denying the claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for a low back disability and entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board found that the appellant's current mechanical low back pain and degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine were not incurred in or aggravated by service. The injury occurred during a weekend drill, but there is no evidence linking it to his current condition.

The Board found that the veteran's current low back disorder is not related to his military service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found no evidence of a nexus between the appellant's service and his current lumbar spine disorder, including arthritis and degenerative disc disease. Therefore, service connection for this condition is not warranted.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly evaluate the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his lumbar spine disability, including obtaining updated medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for chronic low back strain, superimposed on degenerative disc disease at L4-5, L5-S1, with Grade II L5-S1 anterolisthesis was granted. His claims for a higher rating for peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity associated with diabetes mellitus were denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities, as his combined disability evaluation is 60 percent and he does not meet the schedular criteria for consideration of a TDIU.

The claim for a total rating for compensation based upon individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities is not ripe for review as the evaluation of sacralization of L5 lumbar spine was reduced, and additional evidence has been received. The case is REMANDED for further development.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for his lumbar spine disability, finding that the evidence did not support such an increase.

The Board found that the veteran's current back disability is not related to injury incurred in or aggravated during active military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for his chronic active lumbosacral strain - myositis, with central disc protrusion at L5-S1 level.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an effective date prior to November 25, 2003 for the grant of service connection for lumbosacral strain.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a bilateral hip condition and an increased evaluation for his lumbar spine injury. The claim for new and material evidence regarding knee injuries was also denied.