The Veteran is seeking an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for erectile dysfunction and TDIU. The Board denied these claims as no earlier effective dates are warranted.,The earliest claim for both conditions was received on October 31, 2022, for erectile dysfunction, and October 19, 2022, for TDIU.
The deciding factor: The effective date of an award of service connection is generally the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. In this case, the earliest claims were received after these dates and no earlier effective dates are supported by the evidence.,For TDIU, the effective date must be within one year from the date of receipt of the increased rating claim. The Veteran's underlying increase in disability occurred before October 19, 2022, but his application for a TDIU was received on that same day.
- Claimed conditions
- erectile dysfunction, lumbar spine disability, left lower extremity radiculopathy
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- January 14, 2026
- Citation
- 26000543
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 26000543.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: 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.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, prostate cancer, visual impairment, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction due to lack of exposure to herbicide agents during service. The Veteran's claims were not granted.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran meets the basic medical eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits due to his need for personal care services based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury. However, further clinical evaluation is needed to determine if participation in the program is in the Veteran's best interest.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the claims for miscarriage, cervical spine disability, lumbar spine disability, and right elbow disability due to insufficient examination opinions and incomplete service history verification.
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.