BVA decisions by condition

Cold injury residuals: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a cold injury residuals issue in 1,792 decisions. It granted the cold injury residuals issue in 17.0% of them, below the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 35.9%, and remanded it in 46.9%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 32.1% were granted.

Decisions

1,792

2018–2026

Granted

17.0%

All conditions: 19.9%

Granted on the merits

32.1%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

46.9%

Denied: 35.9%

Cold injury residuals outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
283
15.5%38.9%44.2%
2019
307
14.0%37.8%46.3%
2020
266
18.8%39.5%42.9%
2021
196
19.4%37.2%44.4%
2022
219
17.4%27.4%55.3%
2023
182
12.1%26.9%60.4%
2024
167
17.4%35.9%46.1%
2025
115
27.0%38.3%40.9%
2026
57
17.5%47.4%31.6%

Evidence in granted and denied cold injury residuals decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the cold injury residuals issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion24966.3%24.3%+42.0 pts
Favorable VA exam20562.5%26.0%+36.5 pts
Treating physician opinion7655.1%30.9%+24.2 pts
Private medical opinion46445.5%26.6%+18.9 pts
Buddy statement9046.6%31.2%+15.4 pts
Combat service11342.6%31.3%+11.3 pts
Lay statement1,53932.3%31.1%+1.2 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 69.5% of the decisions that granted cold injury residuals.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 55.1% of grants and 15.8% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often cold injury residuals was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion82428.0%36.4%−8.4 pts
Unfavorable VA exam1,20529.3%40.9%−11.5 pts

Why the Board granted or denied cold injury residuals

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established36
  2. Already at the maximum schedular rating9
  3. Service connection established4
  4. New and material evidence received to reopen claim3
  5. Credible lay statements3
  6. Meets criteria for 30% rating under DC 71223
  7. Service records negative or silent3
  8. Continuity of symptomatology since service2

Most common reasons in denials

  1. No current diagnosis129
  2. Service records negative or silent61
  3. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim58
  4. Current diagnosis established44
  5. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service36
  6. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis31
  7. Already at the maximum schedular rating29
  8. Criteria for increased rating not met8

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent cold injury residuals decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26033104M. C. Wilson · 2026

AOJ conceded frostbite diagnosis; Veteran credibly testified to frostbite onset and symptoms; VA examiner's negative opinion given little weight due to reliance on absence of complaints; Benefit of the doubt resolved in Veteran's favor

Citation Nr. A26028932R. Bisignani · 2026

Current disability established; Service treatment records silent regarding cold injury; Credible lay testimony regarding frostbite during Army Ranger School in 1969; Military personnel records corroborate attendance at Ranger School; Established in-service injury; Veteran's statements regarding continuity of symptoms found credible; VA examiner's negative opinion based solely on lack of STRs was overridden; Benefit of the doubt applied, granting service connection

Citation Nr. A26024857Kristin Haddock · 2026

Service treatment records confirm in-service treatment for frostbite; Inadequate VA examination failed to consider lay statements and provide nexus; Later VA evidence confirmed disability and provided positive nexus

Denied

Citation Nr. A26040848K. Conner · 2026

No new and relevant evidence submitted; STRs did not document complaint, treatment, or diagnosis of cold injury; Post-service records silent for residuals of cold injury

Citation Nr. 26005120B. Mullins · 2026

No current diagnosis of frostbite residuals; Service treatment records silent for frostbite complaints; VA examinations found no current disability; Lay testimony not competent for diagnosis

Citation Nr. 26004317Tanya Smith · 2026

Service connection for primary disability (lymphoma) denied.; No evidence of in-service onset or service relation for cold sensitivity.; Benefit of the doubt doctrine does not apply.

Rules that apply to cold injury residuals claims

Research your cold injury residuals case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a cold injury residuals issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.