The Veteran's Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia is being remanded for a VA examination to determine if it is related to his presumed Agent Orange exposure in service.
The deciding factor: The examiner should consider the Veteran's presumed herbicide exposure and exposure to various types of fuel as part of his in-service duties when determining the etiology of his esophagus disability.
- Claimed conditions
- Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 10, 2021
- Citation
- 21073688
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 21073688.
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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claim for further development due to insufficient nexus opinions regarding the Veteran's esophageal conditions, specifically Barrett's esophagus with dysplasia. The examiner is requested to provide an opinion on whether the Veteran's condition is related to service and Agent Orange exposure.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for a digestive disability, including adenocarcinoma of the esophagus, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his active service or any incident therein.
- Granted
The Board of Veterans' Appeals has granted service connection for PTSD and Mood Disorders, both presumed conditions under the PACT Act.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
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.