The veteran is granted an effective date of September 1, 1997 for a 10 percent disability rating for bilateral varicose veins.
The deciding factor: The veteran's service medical records showed moderate varicose veins with superficial venous varicosities and intermittent swelling, numbness, and use of compression hosiery. The revised criteria applicable from January 12, 1998, allowed separate ratings for each lower extremity.
- Claimed conditions
- varicose veins
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 20, 2006
- Citation
- 0618046
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,555 · Granted: 19% (granted or partly granted, in the indexed 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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0618046.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board allowed the benefit or issue identified in this decision. Review the original order: other issues in the same appeal may have a different outcome, and this decision does not predict another claim.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's service connection claims for coronary artery disease, atherosclerosis, peripheral vascular disease, varicose veins, and irritable bowel syndrome are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding secondary service connection.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inextricably intertwined issues of service connection for chronic venous insufficiency and an increased rating for varicose veins. The AOJ must adjudicate both claims, request an addendum opinion from a VA examiner, and readjudicate the issue in light of all evidence.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to errors in duty to assist and insufficient examination, as well as new evidence from the PACT Act. The Veteran's current DVT may be related to a motor vehicle accident during service, and there is no direct evidence of its cause. A VA examination will be conducted to address these issues.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure to provide a VA examination in connection with the service connection claim for varicose veins. The Veteran is presumed to have been exposed to toxic exposure risk activity during his Gulf War service, and there may be a nexus between his varicose veins and this exposure.
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.