The Veteran's service-connected conditions do not require the regular aid and attendance of another person at any point during the period on appeal, thus his claim for SMC based on need for regular aid and attendance is denied.
The deciding factor: The evidence does not show that the Veteran requires the regular care or assistance of another person due to his service-connected conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- lumbosacral strain with degenerative joint disease status post laminectomy and discectomy, coronary artery disease, prostate cancer, obstructive sleep apnea, a back condition (presumably lumbosacral strain), postoperative cholelithiasis, hiatal hernia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, right lower extremity radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve, right lower extremity radiculopathy of the femoral nerve, status post cyst removal of the right foot, scar status post appendectomy with abdominal wall pain, hypertension, erectile dysfunction, lower lumbar scar
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 27, 2022
- Citation
- A22026159
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 A22026159.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected coronary artery disease, finding that the evidence did not support a higher rating based on the severity of his condition.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for obstructive sleep apnea, finding that there is no competent evidence to support a finding that his current condition began in or as a result of service.
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.