Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)PACT Act

Service connection for tinnitus is granted.,An effective date prior to June 6, 2016 for service connection of degenerative disc disease lumbar spine with intervertebral disc syndrome and right lower extremity radiculopathy is denied.,Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for degenerative disc disease lumbar spine with intervertebral disc syndrome and an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy is remanded.,Service connection for a cardiac disability, bilateral hearing loss disability, and rheumatoid arthritis is remanded.,,,

The deciding factor: The Veteran's tinnitus was attributable to active service based on his lay statements of onset in service and persistence since then. The VA examiner’s opinion was inadequate as it improperly disregarded the Veteran’s competent lay statements due to the absence of contemporaneous medical evidence.,There is no communication that can be construed as a claim for service connection prior to June 6, 2016. As such, an effective date prior to June 6, 2016 for service connection for lumbar spine and right lower extremity radiculopathy disabilities must be denied.,The October 2016 VA spine examination did not include the required joint testing for pain on both active and passive motion, and in weight-bearing and non-weight-bearing. A new opinion is needed regarding the current nature and severity of the lumbar spine disability.,There are no records from St. Francis Hospital dated between June 2017 and the present. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability must be remanded for a VA examination to determine its etiology.,,,

Claimed conditions
tinnitus, degenerative disc disease lumbar spine with intervertebral disc syndrome, right lower extremity radiculopathy, cardiac disability (specific type not specified), bilateral hearing loss disability, rheumatoid arthritis
How they argued it
Not specified
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
February 22, 2019
Citation
19113297

Veterans Law Judge

L. Chu

Decisions by this judge: 2,451 · Granted: 22% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)

Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.

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 19113297.

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.

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.