The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for mitral valve insufficiency and an increased evaluation for residuals of rheumatic fever. The veteran did not have valvular heart disease or valvular pathology as a result of his in-service rheumatic fever, and thus, the claim for service connection was found to be not well grounded.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner stated that the veteran did not have valvular pathology, which is required for a 60% evaluation under the revised criteria. The preponderance of evidence supported the current 30% disability rating.
- Claimed conditions
- mitral valve insufficiency, rheumatic fever
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 30%
- Decision date
- March 22, 2000
- Citation
- 0007759
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 0007759.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is denied as there is no evidence of chronicity in service or within the applicable presumptive period.,The Veteran's right little finger disability does not warrant a compensable rating, as it is rated at noncompensable under Diagnostic Code 5230.,The Veteran's hypertension is currently rated at 10 percent and no higher due to lack of evidence showing diastolic pressure predominantly measuring 110 or more, or systolic pressure predominantly measuring 200 or more.,The Veteran's mitral valve insufficiency warrants a 10 percent rating under Diagnostic Code 7000 based on heart failure symptoms at a workload greater than 7.0 METs.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there were duty to assist errors and remands the case for additional development, including obtaining private treatment records and an adequate VA medical opinion.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient medical opinions regarding the Veteran's heart conditions, including paroxysmal atrial fibrillation and mitral valve insufficiency. The Veteran contends that his heart conditions are related to service exposure to herbicide agents (Agent Orange).
- Partly granted
The veteran's claims for service connection for several conditions, including low back disability and diabetes mellitus, type II, were granted. The claim for rheumatic fever was remanded.
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.