The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient examination regarding the etiology of the Veteran's melanoma and its relation to service-connected chloracne. The examiner is asked to provide a new opinion on whether the Veteran's skin cancer, including melanoma, was caused by in-service exposure to herbicides or if it is secondary to his service-connected chloracne.
The deciding factor: The remand requires an updated VA examination and opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's skin cancer, specifically addressing the significance of presumed in-service exposure to herbicide agents and reported sunburns during service.
- Claimed conditions
- melanoma, chloracne
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 10, 2022
- Citation
- 22063216
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 22063216.
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 the Veteran's claim for service connection for melanoma, to include SCC of the right hand, finding that it is at least as likely as not caused by exposure to radiation during service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for hypertension, equilibrium disorder (claimed as bad balance and equilibrium), bilateral restless leg syndrome, bilateral upper extremity tremor, melanoma, and acquired psychiatric disability due to a lack of adequate medical opinions regarding exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune and Agent Orange in Japan.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's spouse is seeking to be substituted as the appellant for claims of service connection filed by the Veteran in August 2017. The AOJ has not yet determined whether she meets the requirements to substitute, and this issue must be remanded.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, hypertension, and melanoma. The Veteran's claims were based on exposure to herbicides at Fort McClellan, but the evidence did not establish actual exposure.
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.