The Board denied a separate compensable rating for diabetic retinopathy and denied a higher than 60 percent rating for diabetic nephropathy. The Veteran's current ratings are considered appropriate based on the evidence of record.
The deciding factor: The evidence did not meet the criteria for a higher rating as it failed to show chronic kidney disease with GFR from 15 to 29 mL/min/1.73 m2 for at least 3 consecutive months during the past 12 months, or requiring regular routine dialysis.
- Claimed conditions
- diabetic retinopathy, diabetic nephropathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 60%
- Decision date
- January 8, 2024
- Citation
- 24001101
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,960 · Granted: 36% (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 24001101.
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 Board has granted the Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates for service connection of coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus type II, diabetic nephropathy, and prostate cancer. The issues of entitlement to special monthly compensation based on housebound status and eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) are remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for asthma, hypertension with residuals including stroke, DM II, bilateral amputation of all toes, and diabetic neuropathy to obtain VA medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of these conditions.,The Board also remanded the claim for ED as it is inextricably intertwined with the DM II claim.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to clarify the dates of bilateral partial foot amputations and their relationship to service-connected diabetes. The AOJ will obtain pertinent private treatment records to determine these details.
- Denied
The Veteran's initial ratings for diabetes and diabetic retinopathy were denied. The Board found that the current ratings adequately reflect the severity of his symptoms, including his need for eye injections to treat his diabetic retinopathy.
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.