Knee decisions — 2006

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for a chronic right knee disorder, which was previously denied in August 1995. The case is now remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for a left knee disability and right hip disability on a secondary basis are not properly addressed due to inadequate notification of VCAA provisions.,Further examination is needed to determine if the veteran's current conditions are related to his service-connected disabilities.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including a left knee disorder and PTSD. The rating of 10 percent for tinnitus remains unchanged.

The veteran is seeking service connection for a bilateral knee disorder, which she claims developed due to her military service. The Board has ordered remand to attempt to obtain the veteran's service medical records and provide proper VCAA notice.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a videoconference hearing. The issues of entitlement to ratings in excess of 10 percent for right and left knee arthralgias, as well as an increased rating for sinusitis with postoperative submucous resection remain in appellate status.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for additional development due to inadequate examination and medical opinion.

The veteran's appeal has been dismissed as the appellant withdrew their appeal prior to a decision being made.

The veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for a total disability evaluation based on unemployability (TDIU) as his combined rating is only 50%.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased initial ratings for his degenerative disc disease at C4-5 and C5-6, residuals of a right knee injury, and hiatal hernia with irritable bowel syndrome. The conditions were rated as 10 percent disabling under direct service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran is not unemployable due to his service-connected disabilities, as he is currently working.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a left knee disability secondary to his service-connected low back and right knee conditions due to insufficient evidence being reviewed by the RO.

The Board is remanding the case to consider new private medical evidence submitted in June 2004 and any other subsequent evidence.

The veteran's claim for financial assistance in the purchase of an automobile or other conveyance and adaptive equipment, or for adaptive equipment only is denied as he does not meet the criteria for entitlement to this benefit.

The Board has granted increased ratings of 30 percent for chondromalacia, right knee with lateral instability and chondromalacia, left knee with status post arthroplasty.

The Board has determined that the veteran's total left knee replacement is currently rated at 30 percent and does not meet the criteria for a higher evaluation.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected left knee disability and right hip disability. The RO must issue a Statement of the Case (SOC) delineating the actions taken with respect to these claims, and if appropriate, undertake further review.

The veteran's in-service injury resulted in current left knee disability and a residual scar. The case is being remanded for further examination to determine the extent of any permanent residuals.

The Board found no evidence to support the veteran's claims of service connection for low back, left foot, right foot, and left knee disabilities. The veteran's current conditions are not linked to his military service or a service-connected disability.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including a VA examination to address the extent of his knee and wrist disabilities.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for aid and attendance, thus denying his claim for special monthly compensation based on need for regular aid and attendance.