The Veteran's claimed residuals of a head injury, including headaches and dizziness, were not incurred in or aggravated by service. The Board found that the Veteran's prostate disorder (BPH) is related to his active service, but did not find any link between his skin condition and service.
The deciding factor: The VA examiner opined that the Veteran's BPH was likely due to aging rather than herbicide exposure, as it is a common age-related condition. The examiner also noted that the Veteran's skin conditions are not presumptively related to Agent Orange exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- Residuals of a head injury, Prostate disorder, Skin disorder
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- December 13, 2016
- Citation
- 1646725
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 1646725.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
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: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for further development due to insufficient evidence and need for additional examinations.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for bladder and prostate disorders, finding that the evidence does not support a link to service or environmental exposures. The Veteran's claims were based on direct causation rather than presumptive exposure.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's eligibility for enrollment in VA's Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (PCAFC) due to her not requiring personal care services for a minimum of six continuous months based on an inability to perform one or more activities of daily living, a need for supervision or protection, or a need for regular or extensive instruction without which the ability to function in daily life would be seriously impaired.
- Whole decision: Partly granted
The Board granted the reopening of claims for service connection for a heart disorder, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and gout. The remaining claims were remanded for further development.
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.