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 assigned
- None in this 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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0928564.
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 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.