The Veteran's claims for service connection and increased evaluation of his right mid calf disability, as well as his claim for TDIU are being remanded due to the need for additional development.
The deciding factor: Additional medical examination is needed to clarify the nature and etiology of the Veteran's heart disorder and peripheral vascular disease, and to evaluate the impact on his ability to work.
- Claimed conditions
- heart disorder, peripheral vascular disease
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 19, 2012
- Citation
- 1236269
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 1236269.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for service connection due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and authorization for private treatment providers. The issues include heart disorder, OSA, sinusitis, lumbar spine disorder, and right knee disorder all related to Agent Orange exposure.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's peripheral vascular disease is being remanded due to a duty to assist error, and an addendum opinion is needed to determine if the condition is related to service or his service-connected CAD.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a heart disorder, to include ischemic heart disease (IHD), finding that there was not sufficient evidence to establish a link between his current condition and his military service. The Board noted that the Veteran did not have active military service from January 9, 1962, to July 31, 1980, and that he was not exposed to herbicide agents during his military service.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus type II (DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD), finding that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active duty at Fort McClellan. The Board also found support for secondary service connection for diabetic neuropathy of various extremities, peripheral vascular disease, and gastroparesis as secondary to DM.
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.