The Veteran seeks service connection for a dermatological disability that he claims began in service and has continued to worsen since. The Board finds the competent medical evidence insufficient to determine whether the Veteran's current dermatological disability is chloracne (or other acneform disease consistent with chloracne) as would entitle him to presumptive service connection due to exposure to herbicides during service. A remand is required for the Veteran to undergo a VA examination to determine the diagnosis of his current dermatological disability and whether it is related to active duty service, including as due to exposure to herbicides.
The deciding factor: The medical evidence does not establish a clear diagnosis of the Veteran's current dermatological disability or its etiology with sufficient certainty to grant service connection based on presumptive exposure to herbicides.
- Claimed conditions
- dermatological disability
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 20, 2010
- Citation
- 1047276
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 1047276.
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
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for a dermatological disability and a separate rating for upper extremity neuropathy, as well as the Veteran's claim for TDIU prior to May 14, 2008. The Board found no evidence of current disabilities that were incurred in or are otherwise related to active service.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder disability, dermatological disability, and neurological disability. The decision is based on the lack of current diagnoses for these conditions.
- 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.
- Granted
Service connection for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is granted. The appeal as to the issue of entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction is dismissed.
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.