The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for a bilateral eye disability and hepatitis C, as well as the claim for TDIU due to the need for additional development.
The deciding factor: The claims are being remanded because further development is required to obtain updated treatment records and provide an opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's hepatitis C.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral eye disability, hepatitis C
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 26, 2022
- Citation
- 22031317
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 22031317.
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 expanded the scope of the claim for major depression to encompass any mental health disability raised by the record and has remanded six issues for additional development.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for COPD, PTSD, hepatitis C, TDIU, and temporary total disability evaluation due to a failure to address his timely request for higher-level review of the July 2018 rating decision.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the claims for diabetes, gum disease, hypertension, orthopedic foot disorder, left shoulder disorder, right shoulder disorder, hepatitis C, skin disorder of the feet (claimed as trench foot), and an acquired psychiatric disorder (claimed as depression and anxiety) due to errors in duty to assist.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error, specifically failing to obtain an opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current bilateral eye disability is related to service exposure to burn pits. The AOJ should obtain such an opinion.
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.