The Veteran's fatty liver condition is denied as the preponderance of evidence does not support a link to his active duty service.,The Veteran's toenail problems are denied as there is no in-service onset and current medical literature does not support a link to burn pit exposure.,The Veteran's bad rashes are remanded for an addendum opinion regarding whether they are related to his active duty service or aggravated by his claimed burn pit exposure.,The Veteran's allergic rhinitis is remanded for an addendum opinion regarding whether it is related to his active duty service, proximately due to a service-connected disability, or aggravated beyond its natural progression.
The deciding factor: The preponderance of the evidence does not support a link between the Veteran's fatty liver condition and his active duty service.,There was no in-service onset of toenail problems and current medical literature does not support a link to burn pit exposure.,An addendum opinion is needed to determine if the Veteran’s bad rashes are related to his active duty service or aggravated by his claimed burn pit exposure.,An addendum opinion is needed to determine if the Veteran's allergic rhinitis is related to his active duty service, proximately due to a service-connected disability, or aggravated beyond its natural progression.
- Claimed conditions
- fatty liver, toenail problems (thinning and coming off), bad rashes, allergic rhinitis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 28, 2020
- Citation
- 20057069
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 20057069.
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 appeals for service connection for asthma and a 10 percent rating based on multiple noncompensable service-connected disabilities were dismissed. The claim of entitlement to a compensable rating for eczema was denied, while the claim of entitlement to allergic rhinitis was not addressed as it pertained to different issues.
- Granted
The Veteran's service-connected disabilities rendered him so helpless as to be in need of regular aid and attendance, leading to the grant of SMC based on aid and attendance.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection due to incomplete findings and failure to properly address the onset, cause, and nature of his conditions. The VA will need to schedule examinations to determine if his rhinitis and bilateral hand disabilities are related to service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to new evidence received, and a need for additional medical opinions considering the Veteran's military occupation as a water safety survival instructor.
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.