Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2010

The Veteran's DDD, lumbar spine was rated at 40 percent from September 28, 2004. The Board granted this rating.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased ratings were denied. The initial noncompensable rating for asthma was granted, but the claim for an increase to a higher rating since March 10, 2005, was denied.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his lumbar spine disability is being remanded due to the need for a more contemporaneous VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case for scheduling a videoconference hearing due to the appellant's request.

The Veteran's lumbar spine disability is currently rated at 40 percent, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted based on the evidence of record.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, hypertension, cervical spine disorders, lumbosacral spine disorders, residuals of a left humeral fracture (steel plate in left arm), and severe joint disease are not related to his active service. The claims for these conditions have been denied.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for psoriasis, degenerative joint and disc disease of the lumbar spine, and degenerative joint disease of the left knee were denied as there is no evidence to support a higher rating based on current symptoms.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, which effectively resolves the Veteran's appeal. The claim of entitlement to an increased evaluation for degenerative disk disease of the lumbar spine is remanded as there remains a justiciable issue regarding the appropriate rating and effective date. The claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is also remanded due to inadequate VA examination.

The Veteran's claim for higher initial ratings for his service-connected low back disorder has been denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating prior to March 17, 2008 and from March 17, 2008 onward.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for low back disability but denied it on the merits. The evidence does not establish a link between the current low back disability and service.

The Veteran's claim for a higher level of SMC based on the need for aid and attendance was denied as she does not meet the threshold requirement of entitlement to SMC at the maximum rate or an intermediate rate.

The Veteran's claim for a higher initial disability rating for his mechanical low back pain syndrome with L5-S1 and L2-L4 discogenic disk disease and degenerative changes is being remanded due to the need for additional examination, treatment records review, and readjudication.

The Veteran withdrew his appeals for reopening a claim of service connection for bilateral foot disability and seeking service connection for back disability, right ankle disability, and right thumb fracture. The Board has dismissed these matters as the appellant has withdrawn them.

The Board denied service connection for right hip, left hip, and lumbar spine disorders as secondary to the service-connected left femur disability.

The Board found no evidence of a low back disability or arthritis of the hips that was incurred in service, and denied both claims.

The Board has granted service connection for L5-S1 disc space narrowing and spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine, finding that it was aggravated by the Veteran's in-service back injury. The other issues remain unresolved.

The Veteran's initial increased rating for mild multilevel spondylotic disease of the lumbar spine is granted, with a current effective date of May 28, 2004.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have a back disability attributable to his active military service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's service-connected back disability is productive of no more than a limitation of motion of 50 degrees due to pain, and there is no evidence of physician-prescribed bed rest due to incapacitating episodes of back pain during four weeks of the last twelve months. The criteria for the establishment of a 20 percent rating have been met.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete development of records and the need for additional medical opinions.