The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional development, including a VA examination and review of medical records. The Veteran's eye disabilities are presumed related to herbicide agent exposure in service.
The deciding factor: Additional evidence is needed to determine if the Veteran's current eye disabilities are related to his service or any other relevant factors.
- Claimed conditions
- moderate nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, chronic allergic conjunctivitis, senile combined cataract, presbyopia
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 4, 2023
- Citation
- 23025791
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 23025791.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's claims for an earlier effective date and a higher initial disability rating for chronic allergic conjunctivitis were denied. The Board found that the Veteran was already in receipt of the maximum available evaluation, and thus no increase in rating is warranted.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for vertigo, chronic allergic conjunctivitis, and recurrent acute maxillary and ethmoidal sinusitis with underlying chronic allergic rhinitis. The decision is based on direct service connection due to in-service onset of these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's eye disabilities, including bilateral cataracts, hypertensive retinopathy, hypermetropia, astigmatism, presbyopia, unspecified peripheral retinal degeneration, dry eye syndrome, presence of intraocular lens, old branch retinal vein occlusion, and bilateral pinguecula.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for SMC on account of being housebound was dismissed. The Board granted SMC based on the need for regular aid and attendance of another person, finding that he requires assistance with various daily activities due to his service-connected disabilities.
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.