The veteran's initial ratings for coronary artery disease and hypertension have been granted, with the coronary artery disease receiving a 30% rating from December 9, 1997 to August 24, 2001; a 60% rating from August 25, 2001 to July 18, 2004; and hypertension receiving a 10% rating.
The deciding factor: The veteran's coronary artery disease met the criteria for a 30% rating during the period from December 9, 1997 to August 24, 2001, as it did not preclude more than light manual labor and his MET work load was greater than 5. From August 25, 2001 to July 18, 2004, the veteran's coronary artery disease met the criteria for a 60% rating due to chronic congestive heart failure.
- Claimed conditions
- coronary artery disease, hypertension
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 30%
- Decision date
- December 11, 2006
- Citation
- 0638527
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,325 · Granted: 31% (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 0638527.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including VA examinations.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to conflicting opinions regarding service connection for peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, and skin disabilities related to herbicide 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.