The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a heart condition, finding that there was no evidence of a nexus between his current heart conditions and his military service. The Board noted that the Veteran had not provided lay reports of an in-service injury related to his claimed heart condition except for exposure to herbicides, but conceded this exposure. The Board found that the most probative evidence did not support a connection between the Veteran's diagnosed conditions and his in-service exposure.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner found it less likely than not that the Veteran’s diagnosed conditions are related to his in-service exposure to an herbicide agent, explaining that they are more likely due to aortic stenosis and hypertension. The Board also noted that there was no credible connection between the Veteran's claimed heart condition and his in-service injury.
- Claimed conditions
- Congestive Heart Failure (CHF), Valvular heart disease (aortic stenosis)
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 3, 2020
- Citation
- 20058325
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 20058325.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied a higher rating for CAD and remanded the claim of service connection for CHF due to a duty to assist error.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the evidence is in approximate balance regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected acquired psychiatric disorders led to his claimed congestive heart failure with automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator. The claim for secondary service connection is granted.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a lack of adequate medical opinion regarding the Veteran's heart conditions and their relation to service. The Veteran is asked to provide an addendum opinion from a qualified medical professional.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the appeal for service connection of PTSD and denied service connection for CHF. The Veteran's claim for PTSD was improperly concurrent with a Supplemental Claim, leading to its dismissal.
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.