The Veteran's claim for service connection for Barrett’s esophagus is denied as there is no evidence of a diagnosis during or within one year after service and the Board finds that it is less likely than not related to his military service, including exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for urinary retention is remanded due to insufficient information regarding its etiology. The examiner should consider whether it was incurred in or caused by service, including exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.
The deciding factor: Service treatment records do not show any complaints of, treatment for, or diagnosis of Barrett’s esophagus during service. The Board finds that the Veteran's claim is denied as there is no evidence of a diagnosis during or within one year after service and it is less likely than not related to his military service.,The September 2019 VA opinion is inadequate as it does not consider direct service causation for urinary retention. A remand is needed to obtain a supplemental VA opinion that considers both presumptive and direct service connection theories.
- Claimed conditions
- Barrett’s esophagus, urinary retention
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- June 24, 2020
- Citation
- 20042821
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. Read the original VA decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 20042821.
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: Dismissed
The Veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of Diabetes Mellitus, Type II and urinary retention (also claimed as bladder condition). The Board dismissed the appeal due to the withdrawal.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's thalamic injury and resulting disabilities are the result of a non-VA procedure performed at MUSC. The Board finds that VA may have proximately caused this treatment by referring the Veteran to MUSC for care, but the evidence is incomplete regarding whether VA specifically referred him or if additional records need to be obtained.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board remanded the veteran's claim for compensation due to incomplete records and the need for a more detailed medical opinion.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board denied service connection for neurogenic bladder, finding no evidence of the condition during active service or a relation to herbicide exposure.
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.