The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the Veteran's exposure to asbestos and the etiology of his meningioma. The case will be returned for further development, including obtaining findings of fact about postservice exposure and forwarding the record to an appropriate clinician for a new opinion.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the previous opinions were inadequate due to their speculative nature and lack of consideration of all relevant facts, particularly regarding the Veteran's postservice employment as a custodian at a school.
- Claimed conditions
- Meningioma
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- November 9, 2021
- Citation
- 21068106
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 21068106.
What this means for you
A remand sends an issue back for more development, often a new examination or missing records. It does not award the benefit or decide the final outcome. The original decision explains the additional work ordered.
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: Granted
The Board granted service connection for meningioma and the cause of the Veteran's death, finding a nexus to herbicide exposure during military service.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board granted service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death, finding a link between his meningioma and in-service exposure to herbicide agents.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Veteran's service connection for residuals of a meningioma is granted, and he also receives special monthly compensation based on the need for regular aid and attendance.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a pre-decisional error in not obtaining an opinion regarding secondary service connection for meningioma. The Veteran's contention that his meningioma is due to radiation treatment for his service-connected prostate cancer was considered, and the examiner should address direct service connection.
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.