Back / lumbar spine decisions — 2016

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a low back or heart disability that is causally related to service, and thus denied both claims.

The Board has determined that further development is needed for the Veteran's claims, including obtaining additional medical records and scheduling VA examinations to reassess his spine disability and determine if a right knee disability is related to service.

The Board finds it not factually ascertainable that the Veteran's service-connected back disability or peripheral neuropathy underwent an increase in disability between June 2010 and June 2011, thus denying earlier effective dates for his increased ratings.

The Veteran's appeal has been withdrawn prior to the Board making a decision.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to assess the impact of his service-connected disabilities on his ability to work, including side-effects from narcotic pain medications.

The Board has ordered additional development to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's low back disability, including whether a pre-service injury existed and was aggravated by service-connected recurrent lumbar strain.

The Board has determined that the criteria for reconsidering a prior denial of service connection for a low back disability have been met, and thus grants the benefit sought.

The Veteran's muscle condition, low back disability, right knee disability, and index finger disability are not service connected. The Board found no evidence to support the Veteran's claims for increased ratings.

The Veteran's claims for higher evaluations and TDIU were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of ankylosis or any other condition warranting a higher evaluation, and his right lower extremity radiculopathy was only compensable at 10 percent prior to November 16, 2013.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and an addendum opinion from the examiner who conducted the June 2014 VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including a supplemental opinion from the VA examiner to address whether his lumbar spine disability is related to service or secondary to service-connected prostatitis and erectile dysfunction.

The Veteran's service-connected degenerative disc disease of the lumbosacral spine warrants a 10 percent rating prior to July 17, 2014. From that date, his disability is rated at 20 percent.

The Board has determined that the appellant does not have a current diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome and therefore, service connection for this condition is denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension has been reopened, and he is now entitled to a 10 percent initial evaluation prior to March 14, 2007. The effective date of his PTSD service connection remains pending.

The Veteran seeks service connection for a lumbar spine disability, to include degenerative disc disease. The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a supplemental VA examination.

The Board denied service connection for right knee disorder, back disorder, bilateral foot condition, and lung disorder due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to service or service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's back disability was not rated higher than 20 percent, and his right and left leg radiculopathies were each granted a 20 percent rating effective August 26, 2011 and August 26, 2014 respectively.

The Veteran's diffuse lumbar spondylosis with degenerative disc space narrowing L5-S1 is rated at 20 percent, and the separate ratings for moderate incomplete paralysis of the sciatic nerve in both lower extremities are also granted.

The Veteran's left knee disability is found to be at least as likely as not aggravated by service.,The Veteran's low back disability is found to be at least as likely as not incurred during active duty for training.

The Veteran's lumbosacral strain has been evaluated at a 10 percent rating since September 23, 2002. The evidence does not meet the criteria for a higher disability rating under the amended regulations.