Veterans’ RightsAn independent resource for veterans
← All decisions
Remanded (sent back)

The Veteran's mastectomy is not service connected as it was due to gynecomastia, which may be caused by alcohol use. The Board finds the evidence does not support a finding that the mastectomy is related to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.,The Veteran has COPD and lung nodules since 2015. The VA examiner found no evidence of hepatic steatosis being confirmed by a physician other than the radiologist, but there was an indication from a January 2015 treatment note that it may be related to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.,The Veteran has a heart condition and COPD since 2015. The VA examiner found no evidence of hepatic steatosis being confirmed by a physician other than the radiologist, but there was an indication from a January 2015 treatment note that it may be related to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.,The Veteran has lung nodules since 2015. The VA examiner found no evidence of hepatic steatosis being confirmed by a physician other than the radiologist, but there was an indication from a January 2015 treatment note that it may be related to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.,The Veteran has hepatic steatosis since 2015. The VA examiner found no evidence of hepatic steatosis being confirmed by a physician other than the radiologist, but there was an indication from a January 2015 treatment note that it may be related to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune.

The deciding factor: The Veteran's mastectomy is not service connected as it was due to gynecomastia, which may be caused by alcohol use. The VA examiner found no evidence of hepatic steatosis being confirmed by a physician other than the radiologist.

Claimed conditions
mastectomy, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), heart condition, lung nodules, hepatic steatosis
How they argued it
Secondary to another service-connected condition
Exposure basis
None
Rating assigned
None in this decision
Decision date
January 6, 2021
Citation
21000726

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 21000726.

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.

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.