The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding mustard gas exposure during reserve service, and requests that the Chemical Corps at Fort Lewis provide details on potential exposure.
The deciding factor: Insufficient evidence was provided to determine if the Veteran had exposure to mustard gas during his military service.
- Claimed conditions
- pulmonary condition, ankylosing spondylitis, esophageal dysmotility, gastroparesis
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- July 30, 2009
- Citation
- 0928564
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. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0928564.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for diabetes mellitus type II (DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD), finding that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active duty at Fort McClellan. The Board also found support for secondary service connection for diabetic neuropathy of various extremities, peripheral vascular disease, and gastroparesis as secondary to DM.
- Whole decision: Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for service connection for degenerative arthritis of the spine, including retrolisthesis of L3 over L4 and ankylosing spondylitis (claimed as low back condition) has been dismissed due to withdrawal by the appellant.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's daughter seeks recognition as his child for purposes of entitlement to DIC benefits due to permanent incapacity for self-support prior to the age of 18. The appellant submitted medical records and statements describing her disability, but VA did not provide an extension to obtain additional private treatment records. The Board finds this a procedural error and remands the case.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's TDIU for accrued benefits purposes is granted, and the initial compensable rating for his service-connected back scar is denied. The claims of higher ratings for lumbar spine disability, bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy are remanded.
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.