The Board granted service connection for basal cell carcinoma of the left superior medial upper back, right ear, and right forearm based on in-service herbicide exposure.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's basal cell carcinomas are found to be a result of in-service herbicide exposure due to combat deployment to Iraq.
- Claimed conditions
- basal cell carcinoma left superior medial upper back, right ear basal cell carcinoma, right forearm basal cell carcinoma
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Agent Orange / herbicides
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- April 30, 2025
- Citation
- A25039887
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,135 · Granted: 33% (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 A25039887.
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 Board has denied service connection for pancreatitis and has remanded the issue of service connection for right ear basal cell carcinoma due to insufficient evidence regarding potential radiation exposure during service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for right ear basal cell carcinoma, a skin condition on the back (including chloracne and scar residuals), and an increased rating for ischemic heart disease. The Veteran's exposure to toxic herbicide agents in service is presumed.
- Granted
The Board of Veterans' Appeals has granted service connection for PTSD and Mood Disorders, both presumed conditions under the PACT Act.
- 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.
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.