Citation Nr: 21041968 Decision Date: 07/10/21 Archive Date: 07/10/21 DOCKET NO. 16-33 206 DATE: July 10, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a rating in excess of 60 percent for varicose veins, right lower extremity is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's varicose veins of the right lower extremity do not result in persistent edema and the symptoms are relieved with elevation of the extremity. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a disability rating in excess of 60 percent for varicose veins of the right lower extremity have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.114, Diagnostic Codes 7120. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from March 1980 to September 1985. The matter was remanded in June 2019. Following development, the matter has now returned to the Board for Review. Increased Ratings Disability ratings are determined by evaluating the extent to which a Veteran's service-connected disability adversely affects his or her ability to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, by comparing his or her symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule). See 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. If two ratings are potentially applicable, the higher rating will be assigned if the disability more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the Veteran. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Separate evaluations may be assigned for separate periods of time based on the facts found. In other words, the evaluations may be "staged." Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007) (staged ratings are appropriate when the factual findings show distinct periods where the service- connected disability exhibits symptoms that would warrant different ratings). Varicose Veins of the Right Lower Extremity The Veteran's varicose veins of the right lower extremity are rated as 60 percent disabling under Diagnostic Code 7120. 38 C.F.R. § 4.104. Under that diagnostic code, a 20 percent rating is warranted with persistent edema, incompletely relieved by elevation of extremity, with or without beginning stasis pigmentation or eczema. A 40 percent rating is warranted with persistent edema and stasis pigmentation or eczema, with or without intermittent ulceration. A 60 percent rating is warranted with persistent edema or subcutaneous induration, stasis pigmentation or eczema, and persistent ulceration. A 100 percent rating is warranted with massive board-like edema with constant pain at rest. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to an increased rating in excess of 60 percent for venous insufficiency of the right lower extremity. The Veteran is evaluated at 60 percent disabling effective June 22, 2009. His claim for an increased rating was filed in 2013. The Veteran underwent a VA examination for his right leg vein condition in February 2014. The examiner noted a diagnosis of chronic symptomatic varicose veins requiring daily use of compression stockings. The Veteran complained of severe pain, discoloration, swelling, and recurrent ulceration of the right lower extremity. The examiner found persistent stasis and edema. There was constant pain at rest and aching of the leg after prolonged walking or standing. Intermittent ulceration was also reported. Following the June 2019 Remand, the Veteran was afforded two VA examinations to determine the current level of severity of all impairment resulting from the Veteran's right lower extremity varicose veins. A VA exam was conducted in June 2019. This exam noted aching and fatigue in leg with prolonged standing and walking; and noted symptoms relieved by elevation of extremity and by compression hosiery. There was persistent stasis pigmentation, eczema, and ulceration, persistent edema incompletely relieved by elevation of extremity, persistent subcutaneous induration, and constant pain at rest. The examiner noted that this vascular condition will impact the Veteran's ability to complete any job requiring sitting, standing, or walking longer than 30 minutes. Massive board like edema was not reported. (It is noted that a total rating based on individual unemployability has been assigned and is not otherwise at issue herein.) The Veteran was sent for further examination in January 2020. In this exam, the Veteran was again not reported to have massive board-like edema with constant pain at rest. However, this exam reported aching in the Veteran's leg after prolonged standing, persistent stasis pigmentation, persistent ulceration, and persistent edema. Analysis As noted above, the Veteran's varicose veins are evaluated pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.104, Diagnostic Code 7120. Under that criteria, an evaluation of 60 percent is warranted when there is persistent edema or subcutaneous induration, stasis pigmentation or eczema, and persistent ulceration. Here, the medical evidence of record is consistent with the 60 percent evaluation. A higher evaluation of 100 percent is not warranted unless there is massive board-like edema with constant pain at rest. The examinations, and the evidence of record, do not show that the Veteran has massive board-like edema with constant pain at rest. As such, the 100 percent rating cannot be assigned. Accordingly, the Board finds that the currently assigned 60 percent evaluation is appropriate, and that the criteria for a 100 percent evaluation have not been met or approximated at any time during the appeal period. Massive boardlike edema is not shown by the evidence at any time since the Veteran's filed his claim for a higher evaluation for varicose veins. In reaching its conclusion, the Board has considered the Veteran's reports regarding his symptoms. While the Board finds the Veteran's statements regarding the manifestations of his varicose veins credible, it has determined that the more probative evidence consists of that prepared by medical professionals, and such evidence demonstrates that the currently assigned evaluations are appropriate. MICHAEL D. LYON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Omosegbon, Babalakin O. The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.