The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for pleural effusion and diverticulosis, finding that neither condition warranted a rating in excess of the currently assigned 10 percent evaluations.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not support an increase in evaluation beyond the current 10 percent ratings for both conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- pleural effusion, diverticulosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 15, 2007
- Citation
- 0736024
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 0736024.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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 Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty to assist error, and will need to obtain an addendum medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diverticulosis and colon tumor.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service connection claims for various conditions, including adjustment disorder, benign skin lesions, actinic keratosis, poikiloderma, porokeratosis, Parkinson's disease, benign prostatic hypertrophy, hypertension, increased urinary frequency, diverticulosis, duodenal ulcer, and bilateral cataracts are all granted due to exposure to herbicide agents, mustard gas, and ionizing radiation during service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded several issues related to the Veteran's service connection claims due to errors in the initial decision, including inadequate medical opinions and failure to consider all theories of entitlement.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to deficiencies in the medical opinion provided, particularly regarding the relationship between the Veteran's respiratory disability and his exposure to jet fuel during service.
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.