Knee decisions — 2007

The Board found that the veteran's left knee disorder is not related to service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a bilateral knee disorder etiologically related to active service and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, left knee disorder, and evaluations for degenerative disc disease at L5-S1 and a left ankle strain with instability and limitation of motion. The appeal is pending before the Board.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current bilateral knee disability is linked to his service-connected burns, and thus grants service connection for degenerative joint disease of the knees. The lumbar spine disorder is also granted as secondary to the bilateral knee condition. However, an increased level of special monthly compensation remains pending.

The Board denied service connection for hip disorder and arthritis of the left knee, finding no evidence linking these conditions to service. The claim for reopening a right knee arthritis was also denied.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected bilateral pes planus did not cause or aggravate his claimed lumbar spine, bilateral knee, and bilateral hip disabilities. The evidence was insufficient to establish a current disability for any of these conditions.

The Board has determined that service connection is not warranted for PTSD, arthritis of the right hand, hypertension, bilateral shoulder disability, bilateral knee disability, or left ankle disability.,An additional VA examination may be necessary to address the etiology of the veteran's hypertension.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a rating in excess of 30 percent for his bilateral foot disorder and service connection for his claimed bilateral knee condition, finding that there was no evidence to support these claims.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and conducting examinations to determine if the veteran has current disabilities related to his service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to issues related to reopening a claim for PTSD and determining if the veteran timely filed an appeal for his right knee injury.

The Board has remanded the case for further action, including a VA examination and consideration of service connection claims.

The VA denied an increased rating for the veteran's service-connected right knee disability, currently rated at 20 percent.

The Board has granted a 30 percent disability rating for the service-connected instability of the left knee, effective from the date of the veteran's discharge from active duty.

The case is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling the veteran for orthopedic examinations to determine the severity of her low back strain, right hip condition, and right knee disorder.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee osteoarthritis with chondromalacia, service connection for bilateral hearing loss, hepatitis C, tinnitus, a low back disability, and right quadriceps atrophy. The appeal is not about service connection issues.

The Board has granted service connection for right and left knee disorders as secondary to the veteran's service-connected right ankle disability, but denied service connection for right and left hip disorders.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a right knee disorder, osteoarthritis of the right hip, and a right foot disorder due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations have been remanded to the RO for a hearing and further review. The case will be returned to the Board after this is completed.

The veteran's claim for an increased rating for his right knee disability is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and development of records.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to incomplete service records and other procedural issues.