The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for clothing allowances due to use of selenium sulfide shampoo and back brace in 2014. The case is being remanded for further development.
The deciding factor: The decision was based on the lack of certification from the Under Secretary for Health or a designee that the prescribed medications caused irreparable damage to outer garments, and insufficient evidence regarding the use of the back brace causing wear and tear on clothing.
- Claimed conditions
- seborrheic dermatitis of the scalp, degenerative disc disease with low back strain
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 18, 2018
- Citation
- 18111957
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 18111957.
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 Board remands the claim for an increased rating for degenerative disc disease with low back strain to ensure a more thorough examination is conducted.
- Granted
The veteran's claims for service connection for unspecified dermatitis of the hands and seborrheic dermatitis of the scalp were granted.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there has not been substantial compliance with the previous remand directives regarding this issue and another remand is required. The Veteran's attorney asserts a 60 percent rating for entire period of appeal based on treatment during the appeal period, but VA examination opinions have not adequately addressed whether the treatment constitutes systemic therapy.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to non-compliance with prior remand directives and insufficient medical opinions regarding systemic therapy for topical steroid use.
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.