The Veteran is entitled to a 60 percent evaluation for Arteriosclerotic Heart Disease prior to November 19, 2009 and an earlier effective date of July 7, 2004.
The deciding factor: VA determined there was clear and unmistakable error with the May 2009 rating decision which assigned a January 21, 2005 effective date for service connection. The RO assigned an earlier effective date of July 7, 2004 based on receipt of a letter from Dr. VJD.
- Claimed conditions
- Arteriosclerotic Heart Disease (AHD)
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 60%
- Decision date
- December 11, 2014
- Citation
- 1454738
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 1454738.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board denied an effective date earlier than March 14, 2025 for a 10 percent rating for bilateral hearing loss and remanded the claim for an effective date earlier than March 14, 2025 for a 100 percent rating for arteriosclerotic heart disease.
- Granted
The Board granted service connection and ratings for the veteran's diabetes mellitus type II, arteriosclerotic heart disease, hypertension, and diabetic peripheral neuropathy of both lower extremities.
- Granted
The veteran's hearing loss is service-connected, and his AHD was initially granted a noncompensable rating in November 1973. The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is of service origin due to noise exposure during military service. For AHD, the Board determined that the evidence did not meet the criteria for an evaluation in excess of 30 percent prior to January 12, 1998 under either the old or new rating criteria. However, effective January 3, 2003, the veteran's symptoms more nearly approximated a workload of 3 or less METS resulting in dyspnea, fatigue, angina, dizziness, or syncope, or left ventricular dysfunction with an ejection fraction of less than 30 percent. Therefore, a 100 percent evaluation was granted.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.