The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient information regarding the Veteran's exposure claims and a need for additional medical opinions.
The deciding factor: The Board found that there was not sufficient evidence to verify the Veteran's exposure claims, particularly regarding alleged exposures at Fort McClellan Alabama and Huntsville Alabama. As a result, further development is needed to determine if the Veteran had such exposures and their potential impact on his gynecomastia.
- Claimed conditions
- gynecomastia
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 19, 2021
- Citation
- 21069775
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 21069775.
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.
- Granted
The Board has granted readjudication of the issues of service connection for hypogonadism and gynecomastia due to new evidence received since the last rating decision. The claims of service connection for squamous blepharitis, upper and lower eyelid with dry eye syndrome and pinguecula, left eye, right eye are also remanded.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that there was a duty to assist error in the prior decision and has remanded the case for further development regarding whether the Veteran's service-connected back disability caused or aggravated his gynecomastia.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the Veteran's claim should be remanded due to a duty to assist error regarding toxic exposure assessment and for an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his status post-removal gynecomastia and hypertrophy.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for back disability, gastrointestinal condition, gynecomastia, kidney lesion, and liver cirrhosis due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service. The case is remanded for further development.
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.