The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for melanoma, diabetes mellitus type II, and coronary artery disease (CAD) due to potential exposure to contaminated water from Camp Lejeune or Agent Orange. The VA examinations did not provide sufficient opinions regarding these conditions.,The Veteran's hypertension is also being remanded as there are no adequate VA examination records available for review.
The deciding factor: The Board found the June 2021 VA opinions inadequate because they relied on the lack of complaints or diagnoses in service treatment records and the absence of documentation of conditions many years after separation from service. The VA examiner did not consider the Veteran's current medical evidence, such as his December 2020 diagnosis for essential hypertension and amlodipine treatment.
- Claimed conditions
- bronchiectasis, chronic bronchitis, chronic fatigue syndrome, melanoma of the left temple, diabetes mellitus type II, coronary artery disease (CAD), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, diabetic peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity, diabetic peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, erectile dysfunction
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 28, 2023
- Citation
- 23012154
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 23012154.
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 claims for service connection for hypertension and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities due to insufficient medical opinions regarding their etiology.
- 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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including VA examinations.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to conflicting opinions regarding service connection for peripheral neuropathy, hypertension, and skin disabilities related to herbicide 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.