The Board has determined that the Veteran's vascular condition does not warrant a disability rating in excess of 40 percent, as it does not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on persistent edema or subcutaneous induration, stasis pigmentation or eczema, and persistent ulceration.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner found that the Veteran's vascular condition did not manifest all three required criteria (persistent edema, subcutaneous induration, and persistent ulceration) for a 60 percent disability rating.
- Claimed conditions
- vascular condition
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 40%
- Decision date
- January 22, 2020
- Citation
- 20005236
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,104 · Granted: 28% (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 20005236.
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.
- Dismissed
The appeal was dismissed due to the Veteran's death during its pendency.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a vascular condition, including carotid artery stenosis and mild tricuspid valve regurgitation, as claimed due to herbicide exposure. The evidence did not support a finding that these conditions were related to service or herbicide exposure.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding service connection for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical evidence regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's vascular condition, specifically carotid artery stenosis. The VA examiner should consider whether there is a correlation between carotid artery stenosis and coronary artery disease, which may be 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.