The Board partially vacated the March 2024 decision granting presumptive service connection for a skin disability and granted direct service connection. The Veteran's skin disability is presumed to be due to herbicide agent exposure along the DMZ in Korea.
The deciding factor: The examiner opined that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents while stationed along the DMZ, which caused his current skin disability.
- Claimed conditions
- skin disability, chloracne
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 7, 2024
- Citation
- 24032743
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 878 · Granted: 36% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
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 24032743.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's skin disability is remanded for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his condition, including whether it is related to service or toxic exposure risk activities. The Veteran also needs to provide authorization forms for private treatment records.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claims for tinnitus and an acquired psychiatric disability were dismissed due to improper concurrent elections.,The Board found that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of back, sciatic nerve, right shoulder, foot, skin, left-hand, or right-hand disabilities. The claim for headaches was also denied.
- 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.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate opinions regarding the Veteran's skin disability and its relation to his service-connected liver transplant.
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.