The Board has determined that a remand is necessary to obtain additional development in the form of VA examinations and further analysis regarding the veteran's claims for increased rating for alopecia areata, service connection for actinic keratosis and xerosis secondary to alopecia areata, and proper VCAA notification.
The deciding factor: The July 2002 examination report was insufficient for rating purposes due to lack of review of the claims file, failure to address current state of the veteran's disability, and being conducted over four years ago. The VA examiner also failed to address whether the veteran's service-connected alopecia areata caused his actinic keratosis and xerosis.
- Claimed conditions
- alopecia areata, actinic keratosis, xerosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 13, 2006
- Citation
- 0635006
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 112 · Granted: 22% (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 0635006.
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.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for actinic keratosis, finding that his condition had its onset during active duty and is related to exposure to harmful sun while deployed in Afghanistan.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the Veteran's appeals for service connection of squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, and actinic keratosis as the appeal is considered duplicative of a previous decision.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for service connection for alopecia areata was dismissed because she submitted a request for Higher Level Review (HLR) before filing her Notice of Disagreement, which constitutes an impermissible concurrent election.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for an increased disability rating for other specified stressor and trauma related disorder, as well as service connection for alopecia areata, were both denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a 100% disability rating for the former condition or establish service connection for the latter.
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.