The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the assignment of a 10 percent rating for basal cell carcinoma was denied as there is no evidence that he filed a formal or informal application prior to August 30, 2006.,The Veteran's acne vulgaris face and back with tinea pedis were evaluated at 30 percent disabling. The Board found the disability did not meet criteria for a higher rating due to lack of systemic therapy.
The deciding factor: The effective date claim was denied as there is no evidence that the Veteran filed a formal or informal application prior to August 30, 2006.
- Claimed conditions
- Basal cell carcinoma, Acne vulgaris face and back with tinea pedis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 30%
- Decision date
- October 3, 2017
- Citation
- 1744141
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 1744141.
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 remanded the claims of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, basal cell carcinoma, bilateral pseudophakia, dry eye syndrome and blepharitis (bilateral eye conditions), diabetes mellitus type II, hypertension, and heart condition due to inadequate opinions regarding their etiology. The Veteran's exposure to asbestos is conceded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, basal cell carcinoma, bilateral pseudophakia, dry eye syndrome and blepharitis (bilateral eye conditions), diabetes mellitus type II, hypertension, and heart condition due to inadequate opinions regarding their etiology. The Veteran's exposure to asbestos is conceded.
- Granted
The Veteran's PTSD is rated at 70 percent, but no higher. The other conditions are granted with service connection based on in-service exposure.
- Denied
The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for his skin cancer and scar condition was denied as the evidence did not show that the disability more nearly approximated the criteria for a higher rating under any other diagnostic code.
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.