The Veteran's claims for increased ratings were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a rating higher than 20 percent for chronic lumbar strain, and denied other claims.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not show sufficient functional impairment to warrant a higher rating under any applicable diagnostic codes.
- Claimed conditions
- Chronic lumbar strain
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 9, 2026
- Citation
- A26011777
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 A26011777.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Dismissed
The Board dismissed the appeals pertaining to effective dates for increased ratings of chronic lumbar strain and LLE radiculopathy, finding that the Veteran did not properly opt into the AMA system.
- Denied
The Board denied entitlement to a TDIU prior to April 3, 2014, as the evidence did not show that the Veteran was unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation due to his service-connected disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected back conditions, left lower extremity radiculopathy, and right lower extremity radiculopathy. The effective date for the award of service connection for left lower extremity radiculopathy is also being remanded.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for annual clothing allowances for a back brace, left ankle brace, and left knee brace in 2021 due to insufficient evidence of damage to clothing. The claim for menthol camphor gel topical medication was also denied as it did not meet the criteria for a clothing allowance.
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.