The Board has remanded the service connection claims for further development due to insufficient evidence regarding the etiology of the Veteran's skin disorders. The Veteran is seeking service connection for various skin conditions, including actinic keratoses, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanocytic nevi, which he attributes to his in-service exposure to Agent Orange and burn pit duty.
The deciding factor: The Board found insufficient evidence to establish a direct relationship between the Veteran's skin disorders and his service, but recognized that his private medical records and statements regarding his symptoms may support a secondary service connection based on his already service-connected condition of hypertensive vascular disease.
- Claimed conditions
- erectile dysfunction, other seborrheic kerotosis, actinic damage, squamous cell carcinoma, melanocytic nevi of trunk, precancerous actinic keratosis, folliculitis on the chest, high counts of nevi, multiple lesions, neoplasm of uncertain behavior of the skin, other malignant neoplasms of the skin
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 1, 2019
- Citation
- 19160000
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,350 · Granted: 26% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 19160000.
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.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, prostate cancer, visual impairment, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction due to lack of exposure to herbicide agents during service. The Veteran's claims were not granted.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has found that the Veteran meets the basic medical eligibility criteria for PCAFC benefits due to his need for personal care services based on symptoms or residuals of neurological or other impairment or injury. However, further clinical evaluation is needed to determine if participation in the program is in the Veteran's best interest.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for prostate cancer, coronary artery disease (CAD), diabetes mellitus type II (DM II), hypertension, and erectile dysfunction as secondary to service-connected DM II. The Veteran's exposure to Agent Orange during active service is presumed.
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.