Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Denied

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction and diabetic nephropathy was denied.,The Veteran's request for an earlier effective date for service connection for diabetes mellitus was denied.,The Veteran's request for an earlier effective date for service connection of erectile dysfunction and nephropathy was granted, but not due to the diabetes itself.,SMC based on loss of use of a creative organ was assigned an effective date of January 29, 2009.,The Veteran's hypertension did not meet criteria for a compensable rating.,Chronic kidney disease did not meet criteria for a compensable rating.,TDIU and eligibility to DEA under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 35 were granted effective January 27, 2010.

The deciding factor: The medical evidence does not support the need for regulation of activities as part of diabetes management, which is required for a higher rating.,There was no indication that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus required one or more daily injections of insulin and restricted diet and regulation of activities.,The earlier effective date for service connection for erectile dysfunction and nephropathy was granted based on the effective date for service connection for erectile dysfunction, which is the basis for this benefit.,SMC based on loss of use of a creative organ was assigned an effective date of January 29, 2009, as that is when the Veteran filed his claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction and nephropathy.,The Veteran's hypertension did not meet criteria for a compensable rating under applicable diagnostic codes.,Chronic kidney disease did not meet criteria for a compensable rating under applicable diagnostic codes.,TDIU was granted effective January 27, 2010, as the evidence showed that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities precluded substantially gainful employment.

Claimed conditions
diabetes mellitus, erectile dysfunction, diabetic nephropathy
How they argued it
Presumptive (no nexus needed)
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
September 17, 2024
Citation
A24057455

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 A24057455.

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.

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.