The Veteran's claims for service connection for ischemic heart disease, left ear hearing loss, and right ear hearing loss have been denied. The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction has been remanded. His claims for increased ratings for peripheral vascular disease of the lower extremities have also been remanded.,The Board found that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's assertions regarding his right ear hearing loss and thus, the case was remanded for an addendum opinion. The diabetes mellitus claim has been remanded due to a lack of recent examination. Finally, both peripheral vascular disease claims have also been remanded as new examinations are needed.,The Board found that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's assertions regarding his right ear hearing loss and thus, the case was remanded for an addendum opinion. The diabetes mellitus claim has been remanded due to a lack of recent examination. Finally, both peripheral vascular disease claims have also been remanded as new examinations are needed.
The deciding factor: The Board found that there is no evidence to support the Veteran's assertions regarding his right ear hearing loss and thus, the case was remanded for an addendum opinion.,The Board found that there is no recent examination available for diabetes mellitus and both peripheral vascular disease claims have been remanded as new examinations are needed.
- Claimed conditions
- ischemic heart disease, left ear hearing loss, right ear hearing loss, diabetes mellitus, type II with erectile dysfunction, peripheral vascular disease of the left lower extremity, peripheral vascular disease of the right lower extremity
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 17, 2022
- Citation
- 22064344
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 22064344.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
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 service connection for a heart condition, including ischemic heart disease. The evidence did not support a finding of a current disability related to service.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable disability rating for onychomycosis was denied as the condition did not require treatment and covered less than 5% of his body. The Board also remanded issues regarding service connection for left ear hearing loss and entitlement to a compensable disability rating for right ear hearing loss.
- Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of right ear hearing loss, and the case is dismissed.
- Granted
The Veteran's ischemic heart disease is granted as presumptively related to his service in the Gulf War, specifically aboard the USS Chanticleer and USS Mataco.
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.