The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disability due to exposure to herbicides, including status post lipoma excision of the left shoulder and chloracne. The case is being returned to the RO for further development.
The deciding factor: The Joint Motion found that there was insufficient consideration of VA problem lists documenting dermatitis NOS as a current disability or persistent/ recurrent symptoms associated with skin conditions claimed by the Veteran.
- Claimed conditions
- skin disability, status post lipoma excision of the left shoulder, chloracne
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- September 30, 2015
- Citation
- 1542419
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 1542419.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's skin disability is remanded for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his condition, including whether it is related to service or toxic exposure risk activities. The Veteran also needs to provide authorization forms for private treatment records.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claims for tinnitus and an acquired psychiatric disability were dismissed due to improper concurrent elections.,The Board found that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of back, sciatic nerve, right shoulder, foot, skin, left-hand, or right-hand disabilities. The claim for headaches was also denied.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's spouse is seeking to be substituted as the appellant for claims of service connection filed by the Veteran in August 2017. The AOJ has not yet determined whether she meets the requirements to substitute, and this issue must be remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions regarding the Veteran's skin disability and its relation to his service-connected liver transplant.
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.