The Veteran's claim for a higher initial rating in excess of 10 percent for vitiligo is denied as the current rating already represents the maximum schedular evaluation available under Diagnostic Code 7823.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's vitiligo, which affects exposed and non-exposed areas of his body, has been rated at the maximum allowable under Diagnostic Code 7823 (10 percent for skin disability affecting more than 5% but less than 20% of the entire body or more than 20% of exposed areas or if affected skin area is involved with severe disfigurement).
- Claimed conditions
- vitiligo
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 10%
- Decision date
- March 20, 2014
- Citation
- 1411628
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 1411628.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the cases of service connection for vitiligo and obstructive sleep apnea due to inadequate VA examinations. The Veteran will need new VA examinations to address these issues.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for vitiligo, finding that the Veteran's current condition started during his active duty service and had continuity to the present. The decision is based on the Veteran's lay statements and VA treatment records.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the issues of service connection for various cancers and related conditions due to errors in obtaining relevant medical records and inadequate opinions regarding their etiology.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty-to-assist error, requiring an additional medical opinion on the etiology of the Veteran's vitiligo.
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.