GERD (acid reflux) decisions — 2006

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including a VA examination to address the nature and etiology of his respiratory disorder. The issues of an initial compensable rating for hiatal hernia with gastroesophageal reflux disease and an effective date earlier than April 30, 2003 for service connection for chronic low back pain are also being remanded.

The veteran's claims for higher ratings for patellofemoral syndrome of the left knee, gastroesophageal reflux disease with erosive esophagitis, status post cholecystectomy, and left shoulder impingement syndrome were denied as his conditions did not meet the criteria for a higher rating under applicable diagnostic codes.

The veteran's appeal includes claims for an earlier effective date, service connection for PTSD, and secondary service connection for various conditions. The case is being remanded to provide the necessary information and evidence for these claims.

The case is being returned to the RO for additional development due to issues related to the veteran's service-connected disabilities and his claim for additional vocational rehabilitation benefits.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected cervical spine disorder, hiatal hernia with gastroesophageal reflux disease, and ocular hypertensive disorder. The veteran's cervical spine condition is currently rated at 30 percent disabling, while his hiatal hernia and ocular hypertensive disorder are each rated at the minimum compensable rating of 10 percent.

The Board has remanded the case due to a lack of a gastroenterology consultation subsequent to the September 2005 VA examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a diagnosed psychiatric disability, gastroesophageal disease, respiratory condition (COPD), or right shoulder disability related to service. The claims for these conditions are therefore denied.

The Board found no evidence of the veteran's exposure to ionizing radiation in service. There is also no competent medical evidence linking any of his current conditions to service or to such exposure. Therefore, service connection for these claims was denied.

The Board found no evidence of a current esophagitis or gastroesophageal reflux disease, and concluded that the veteran's claimed conditions were not incurred in service. The decision denied the claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for various conditions, finding that there was no evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The veteran's GERD is currently rated at 10 percent, and his DDD of the lumbar spine does not meet the criteria for a higher rating.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development and readjudication due to issues related to service connection, including hypertension and peripheral vascular disease.

The veteran's gastroesophageal reflux disease with hiatal hernia is manifested by symptoms such as pyrosis and substernal pain, warranting a 10% evaluation since August 16, 2001.

The Board has awarded service connection for GERD and a psychiatric disability, including major depressive disorder and panic disorder. The veteran's gastrointestinal symptoms have persisted since active duty, while his psychiatric issues are linked to stressors during service.

The veteran's effective date for additional disability compensation for his dependent son, F.D., is denied as it is not warranted prior to March 1, 2004.

The Board has granted a 30 percent evaluation for the veteran's hiatal hernia with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), which is more than the initial 10 percent assigned in September 1999. The evidence shows persistent symptoms such as abdominal and sternal pain, nausea, vomiting, constipation, left shoulder and chest pain, and heartburn.

The veteran's service-connected low back disability was rated at 40 percent effective May 1, 2005. The RO denied an increased rating for the veteran's GERD with a history of esophageal ulcer and IBS as not related to his active duty service.

The veteran withdrew his appeal for the propriety of a reduction in the schedular evaluation assigned for residuals of carcinoma of the prostate from 100 percent to 0 percent, as effectuated by a rating decision of May 23, 2002, and entitlement to an increased rating for residuals of carcinoma of the prostate, currently evaluated as 40 percent disabling.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and ensuring that the claims file was reviewed as part of a neurological examination.

The veteran's appeal has been dismissed as she withdrew her substantive appeal.