Sleep apnea decisions — 2014

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and TDIU were denied. The Veteran was granted an initial rating of 20 percent for left lower extremity radiculopathy, effective June 1, 2006.

The Veteran's lumbosacral strain with radiculopathy has not been productive of more than mild incomplete paralysis of the sciatic nerves, and therefore does not meet the criteria for a disability rating in excess of 40 percent.

The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to determine the etiology of the Veteran's sleep apnea and whether it is related to service. The appeal will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions on the relationship between his sleep apnea and hypertension to service.

The case is being remanded for further development, including obtaining SSA records and VA treatment records. The Veteran's claim of whether the January 1978 rating decision denying service connection for a back condition was based on clear and unmistakable error (CUE) has not been adjudicated.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's sleep apnea and cold injury residuals are not related to his military service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining updated VA and private treatment records, and for an examination to determine the etiology of his sleep apnea.

The Veteran's claim for a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including scheduling a VA examination and obtaining outstanding VA treatment records.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's chronic obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is not related to his service or a service-connected disability.,The Veteran's left knee disorder does not warrant an evaluation in excess of 10 percent.

The Veteran's chronic lumbosacral strain with disc herniation has been manifested by complaints of pain, but there is no evidence of incapacitating episodes or neurological manifestations for which service connection has already been established. The current disability does not meet the criteria for a rating in excess of 20 percent.

The Veteran's low back disability was rated at 10 percent prior to June 6, 2006 and is now rated at 20 percent from June 6, 2006 forward.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's sleep apnea is aggravated by his service-connected major depressive disorder, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim for service connection for a back disorder and denied it. The Veteran was granted service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, but this is considered secondary to his service-connected nasal obstruction.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to his request for a videoconference hearing. The issues of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disability, sleep apnea secondary to PTSD, and vertigo secondary to bilateral sensorineural hearing loss are still under review.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for sleep apnea, finding that his current diagnosis and symptoms are linked to his military service.

The Veteran's current obstructive sleep apnea is not shown to be related to his military service, and the Board has determined that service connection for this condition cannot be established.

The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's sleep apnea, skin disability, and tumors. The Veteran will be afforded VA examinations for these conditions.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the Veteran's current sleep apnea is related to his military service. The VA examiner must provide an addendum opinion addressing this issue.

The Veteran's current sleep apnea was not incurred in or aggravated by service, and is not caused by or permanently worsened by a service-connected disability.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) for scheduling a videoconference hearing. The case will be returned to the Board after this action.