Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2014

The Veteran's migraines are currently evaluated as 50 percent disabling, rhabdomyolysis as 40 percent disabling, and the back disability as 20 percent disabling from August 1, 2008, and 20 percent disabling from June 18, 2013. The Veteran's appeal is granted for these evaluations.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for a temporary total rating under 38 C.F.R. § 4.30 is denied as the award was granted on March 13, 2009, when he was admitted to a VA medical facility for surgery.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claims for service connection for migraine headaches, a back disorder, and PTSD. The RO previously denied these claims in March 2004 due to lack of established diagnoses during qualifying periods of service.

The Board has found that additional development is necessary and the case is being remanded to obtain a private medical opinion from Dr. Joseph Seipel.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to a withdrawal request from the Veteran's authorized representative.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected low back strain is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected lumbosacral strain is being remanded to allow for a VA examination and further development of the record.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities render him unemployable, and the Board grants his claim for a TDIU.

The Veteran's lumbar spine disability was rated at 20 percent prior to January 8, 2014 and is now granted. The issues of a higher rating are addressed in the remand section.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for a lumbosacral spine disability, including the status post microdiscectomy, is being remanded due to incomplete records and need for further examination.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected low back disability. The issue of TDIU has also been re-raised by the record.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected low back strain, as there are inconsistencies in the medical records and the Veteran reported worsening symptoms.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection for cervical and lumbar spine disabilities due to outstanding evidentiary development, including obtaining treatment records and providing medical opinions.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including an addendum opinion or another examination to address the nature and etiology of any current lumbar spine disability. The Veteran's service connection claim will be reconsidered based on all lay and medical evidence.

The Veteran has been granted service connection for degenerative disc disease of the thoracolumbar spine, with no specific rating assigned and no effective date provided.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his claims, including obtaining VA and private treatment records, Social Security Administration records, and opinions from the May 2012 VA examiners regarding service connection for DM and peripheral neuropathy.

The Veteran's appeal regarding his lumbosacral strain disability was denied, with the Board finding that a higher rating or an earlier effective date were not warranted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's low back disability did not have its onset during active service and is not otherwise related to service. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board has remanded the case for further development and an opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current low back disability is related to service, including a 1979 acute sprain. The appeal will be returned to the AOJ after this.

The Veteran's lumbar strain was evaluated at 20 percent from November 1, 2008 to June 28, 2014 and increased to 40 percent thereafter. The claim is denied as the evidence does not support a higher evaluation.