Sleep apnea decisions — 2005

The Board found that the veteran's osteoarthritis of the lumbosacral spine was not related to his time in service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's low back disability, including arthritis and degenerative disc disease, was not incurred or aggravated in service.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination and issuing a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). The issues are whether he should receive higher initial evaluations for his lumbosacral spine degenerative disc disease and T9 and L1 compression fracture residuals.

The veteran's service-connected degenerative discospondylosis of the lumbosacral spine is currently rated at 20 percent disabling prior to December 15, 2004 and denied for higher ratings. From December 15, 2004, his disability remains rated at 20 percent.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current disability for which service connection can be granted, and therefore his claims are denied.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional evidence and for further development of his claim for increased ratings for lumbosacral degenerative joint and disc disease.

The Board finds that the veteran's bilateral foot fungus, vision loss, PTSD, and back disorder were not incurred during active military service.,Service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Board has granted a 10 percent rating for lumbosacral strain with mild narrowing at L5-S1, and denied the claim for an increased evaluation for right knee strain.

The veteran withdrew his appeals for increased ratings of degenerative disc disease of the lumbosacral spine and hypertension, effectively dismissing these claims.

The veteran's claims for increased evaluations of his lumbosacral strain and right shoulder injury residuals with degenerative joint disease are being remanded to the RO for further action.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected lumbosacral strain did not warrant a higher rating, as it did not meet the criteria for an increased rating under any applicable diagnostic code.

The Board has determined that the veteran's upper and lower back, bilateral shoulder, bilateral leg, right hip, and right knee conditions are not attributable to service or any presumptive exposure basis. The VA examiners have opined that these conditions are more likely due to post-service injuries, including a motor vehicle accident in 1996.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected lumbosacral strain with degenerative disc disease warrants a 20 percent rating effective from April 22, 2004.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining treatment records and scheduling VA examinations to assess the severity of his service-connected hypertension and lumbosacral spondylosis.

The veteran's chronic lumbosacral strain with spondylolisthesis at anterior L5 and S1 is productive of pronounced symptomatology, warranting a 60 percent evaluation.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current low back and left shoulder disorders are not related to service, but his current left knee injury with traumatic arthritis and chronic strain of the right knee are found to be at least as likely as not (50% likelihood or greater) related to service. As such, these conditions have been granted service connection.

The Board has granted a 40% rating for lumbosacral strain with degenerative changes effective April 1, 2005. The claim for TDIU remains pending as the combined rating does not meet the threshold for individual unemployability.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his medical records, particularly those from the Naval Hospital at Roosevelt Roads in Puerto Rico.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an effective date prior to September 26, 1995 for a TDIU due to his service-connected disabilities. The RO granted increased ratings and a TDIU effective September 26, 1995.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to incomplete Social Security Administration records.