The Board has remanded the claims of service connection for low back degenerative disc disease, dry eyes as secondary to right eye pterygium, preglaucoma as secondary to right eye pterygium, and a compensable rating for right eye pterygium due to duty-to-assist errors in obtaining adequate opinions regarding the relationship between the Veteran's conditions and service.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the prior medical opinions were inadequate as they did not address whether the Veteran's current conditions are related to his service-connected disabilities or if there is aggravation of pre-existing conditions.
- Claimed conditions
- low back degenerative disc disease, dry eyes, preglaucoma
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 11, 2024
- Citation
- A24031012
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 A24031012.
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 found that remand is needed for the Veteran's claims due to duty to assist errors, including clarification of periods of service and obtaining relevant records. The Veteran will be afforded new medical examinations for each claimed disability.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's dry eyes are related to service. The claim will be reviewed again with additional evidence.
- 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.
- Granted
The Veteran was granted an earlier effective date of March 26, 2014 for the award of a total disability rating due to individual unemployability (TDIU) and eligibility for Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits. The Board found that she had been unable to obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment due solely to service-connected disabilities from March 26, 2014.
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.