Sleep apnea decisions — 2006

The veteran claims service connection for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, but the case is being remanded to search for in-service records and determine if his current condition is related to service.

The Board has remanded the case for further development to determine the appropriate rating and service connection status of the veteran's low back disability.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain VA treatment records and for a VA examination to determine the extent of his service-connected back disability, including any arthritis or disc disease.

The Board has granted a 20 percent rating for lumbosacral strain since January 31, 2005. Prior to that date, the veteran's disability was rated at 10 percent.

The veteran's appeal for an earlier effective date for the grant of TDIU rating prior to April 27, 1992 is dismissed as this date has now been assigned by the RO. The issue of an initial evaluation in excess of 60 percent for his service-connected lumbosacral spine disorder remains on appeal.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for an increased rating for PTSD and TDIU, finding that his PTSD alone did not warrant a higher disability evaluation or preclude substantially gainful employment.

The Board has granted service connection for the veteran's daily headaches, finding that they are in part secondary to medications he takes for his service-connected myofascial pain syndrome of the lumbosacral spine.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for her lumbosacral strain and right foot disability, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for a compensable or higher rating during the periods in question.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to new evidence submitted by the veteran and his representative.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, a right knee disability, and a back disability. The evidence did not support these claims.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral pes planus, lumbosacral strain, and hiatal hernia are being remanded for further development to determine the current severity of each condition.

The Board finds no evidence of a nexus between the veteran's current diagnoses and his period of active service, resulting in denial of all claims.

The Board found that the veteran's allergic rhinitis and sleep apnea did not manifest during service or are related to his service-connected conditions, thus denying service connection for these conditions.

The VA determined that the veteran's disc disease of the lumbosacral spine did not warrant a rating in excess of 40 percent, as his symptoms and range of motion were within the criteria for a 40 percent rating under the old rating criteria. The Board found no evidence to support a higher rating based on the current or previous diagnostic codes.

The veteran's lumbosacral strain warrants a staged rating of 20 percent from October 25, 2005 and 10 percent from December 30, 2005.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 60 percent for lumbosacral strain with traumatic arthritis, finding that the disability picture did not warrant such a higher rating based on the current evidence.

The veteran seeks service connection for DFSP of the chest, which he contends is due to exposure to various toxic substances in service. The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding potential exposure to herbicide agents and other contaminants.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings and effective dates for his service-connected lumbosacral strain, cervical strain, right knee strain with patella bursitis, left knee strain with patella bursitis, and pseudofolliculitis barbae.

The Board denied a higher initial evaluation for the veteran's lumbosacral spine disability, finding that the evidence did not support a rating in excess of 40 percent.

The VA determined that the veteran's lumbosacral strain does not warrant a rating higher than 20 percent, as his range of motion is sufficient to meet the criteria for a 20 percent disability rating under the revised spinal disability evaluation criteria.