The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for additional development due to the need for updated VA treatment records, Social Security Administration (SSA) records, and a new VA examination.
The deciding factor: The decision is based on the need for further evidence and evaluation as per the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims' June 2016 Memorandum Decision.
- Claimed conditions
- Degenerative disc disease of the thoracolumbar spine, Left L4 radiculopathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 2, 2017
- Citation
- 1706486
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 1706486.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Veteran's back disability is rated at 40 percent prior to January 13, 2022. Effective March 18, 2020, the Veteran is granted TDIU.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received for the Veteran's claims of service connection for degenerative disc disease of the thoracolumbar spine and obstructive sleep apnea. As a result, these claims are being remanded to allow for further review.
- Granted
The Veteran is granted entitlement to Chapter 33 educational assistance benefits at the 100 percent rate due to his service-connected back disability and discharge from active duty.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for his lumbar spine disability. The Court granted a JMPR, which required the Board to address pain on passive range of motion and nonweight-bearing testing. The case is now remanded due to inadequate examination documentation.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.