The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to determine the nature and likely etiology of the veteran's cancer of the sinuses, including whether it is related to exposure to Agent Orange. The case will be remanded for further development.
The deciding factor: A VA examination is required to assess the relationship between the veteran's cancer of the sinuses and his military service, particularly potential exposure to Agent Orange.
- Claimed conditions
- cancer of the sinuses
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- October 10, 2003
- Citation
- 0327276
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 0327276.
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 has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including chloracne, peripheral neuropathy, porphyria cutanea tarda, skin cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, multiple myeloma, Hodgkin's Disease, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, cancer of the sinuses, respiratory cancer, cancer of the mouth with blindness, and prostate cancer are not reopened due to lack of new and material evidence.
- Denied
The veteran's cancer of the sinuses is not considered to be related to his military service, including exposure to Agent Orange.
- Granted
The Board of Veterans' Appeals has granted service connection for PTSD and Mood Disorders, both presumed conditions under the PACT Act.
- 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.
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.