The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disability, finding that there was no evidence of current skin disabilities present during or within one year after service. The Board also found that any current skin conditions were not related to in-service herbicide exposure.
The deciding factor: The VA examiners' opinions supported by medical literature indicated that the Veteran's current skin conditions did not have their onset during service and were not linked to herbicide exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- xerosis, psoriasiform dermatitis, actinic keratosis, dermatophytosis, tinea pedis, tinea cruris, tinea versicolor
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- August 3, 2023
- Citation
- 23042715
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 23042715.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
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 case due to insufficient evidence regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's diagnosed bilateral tinea pedis, which is a condition related to service.
- Granted
The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for actinic keratosis, finding that his condition had its onset during active duty and is related to exposure to harmful sun while deployed in Afghanistan.
- Dismissed
The Board has dismissed the Veteran's appeals for service connection of squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma, and actinic keratosis as the appeal is considered duplicative of a previous decision.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to errors in considering all conditions and a need for an addendum opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's current right great toe / foot disability and his claimed frostbite injury.
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.