Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2013

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of entitlement to a compensable disability rating for service-connected tension headaches and entitlement to total disability rating due to individual unemployability as a result of service-connected disabilities. The case is being returned to the RO for further development.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence in the April 2010 VA examination report, and a new medical opinion is needed regarding the nature and etiology of any back disorder.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claimed residuals of a head injury and back disability were not incurred or aggravated by service, as there is no evidence of in-service injury or chronicity. The VA specialists concluded that these conditions are less likely than not related to service.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for thoracolumbar degenerative disc disease and a TDIU has been remanded due to the need for additional VA examinations, updated treatment records, and clarification of the impact of his service-connected disabilities on his ability to work.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current lumbar spine disability, including degenerative disc disease and spinal stenosis, is not related to his service. The VA examiner found no medical nexus between the Veteran's in-service injury and his current condition.

The Board has determined that the September 2010 medical opinion against the claim is not adequate for adjudication purposes and that the Veteran should be afforded another examination to determine the nature and etiology of his back disability.

The Veteran's service-connected lumbar strain with degenerative disc disease is currently rated at 20 percent, but the September 2012 VA examination and opinion indicate that it warrants a higher rating of 40 percent.

The Veteran's disability manifested by low back degenerative changes including arthritis is not due to disease or injury that was incurred in or aggravated by active service; nor may arthritis be presumed to have been incurred therein.

The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to the need for medical opinions regarding the Veteran's cervical and lumbar spine disabilities, as well as for VA treatment records.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA examination and additional medical records, as well as new evidence of a lumbar spine disability.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for SMC based on the need for regular aid and attendance was denied as there was no pending claim prior to May 13, 2009. The effective date of May 13, 2009 is established based on a medical opinion dated that day.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his back disability was denied, and the effective date of TDIU remains unresolved.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating prior to December 14, 2010, or effective from December 14, 2010.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining additional medical records and arranging for a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's pes planus was aggravated in service and whether he currently has a back disability that is related to his pes planus.

The Veteran's headaches are currently rated at 10 percent, but do not meet the criteria for a higher rating as they have not resulted in characteristic prostrating attacks occurring on average once per month over the last several months.,The Veteran's thoracic back fracture residuals and chronic low back strain disabilities are both currently rated at 10 percent. The VA examinations did not show any increased severity of symptoms or manifestations, and there is no evidence of very frequent completely prostrating and prolonged attacks productive of severe economic inadaptability.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to incomplete verification of his periods of active military service, particularly in the Tennessee Army National Guard. He is also requested to clarify when he was diagnosed with diabetes, hypertension, or cardiovascular disorders.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further action, including scheduling a videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.

The Veteran's peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities and numbness in the arms are not shown to be related to service or any presumptive exposure. The heart disorder is presumed associated with herbicide exposure, but no current diagnosis has been established.,Hypertension is also presumed associated with herbicide exposure, but no current diagnosis has been established.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation prior to March 5, 2012.

The Board has requested additional development to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed left knee, right knee, and low back disorders. The case is being remanded for further examination and opinion.