The Veteran's claims for higher ratings for urinary incontinence and ischemic heart disease were denied. The Board found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a rating higher than 60 percent for his urinary incontinence, and also did not meet the criteria for a rating higher than 60 percent for his ischemic heart disease from August 27, 2004 through February 23, 2008 and from June 1, 2008 through October 12, 2010. The Board also found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a rating higher than 30 percent since October 13, 2010.
The deciding factor: The VA examinations and medical records showed that the Veteran's ischemic heart disease had improved to the point where he was asymptomatic with an ejection fraction of over 45%, and his urinary incontinence did not meet criteria for a higher rating as it did not involve renal dysfunction or significant effects on occupation.
- Claimed conditions
- Urinary Incontinence, Ischemic Heart Disease
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 29, 2016
- Citation
- 1638962
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 1638962.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected ischemic heart disease was granted a 30% disability rating effective August 31, 2010. The condition manifested as cardiac hypertrophy and a workload of greater than 5.0 but less than 7.0 METs without congestive heart failure or LVEF of 50 percent or less.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for urinary incontinence, lumbar radiculopathy, and erectile dysfunction due to pre-decisional duty to assist errors. The claims will be reconsidered with new evidence and opinions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, ischemic heart disease, diabetic neuropathy, prostate cancer residuals, bilateral diabetic peripheral neuropathy of the lower extremities (sciatic), and diabetes mellitus Type 2, combine to result in physical or mental impairment that renders him so helpless as to require regular aid and attendance of another person. However, the need for aid and attendance must be determined without considering nonservice-connected disabilities.
- Granted
The Veteran is found to be eligible for enrollment in the PCAFC program due to his severe and complex medical conditions, which require personal care services.
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.