The Board has remanded the case due to deficiencies in the VA medical opinions regarding secondary service connection for varicose veins and/or PAD. The Veteran's vascular disabilities are currently service-connected, but there is uncertainty about whether they are related to his cellulitis or if they were caused by exposure to herbicide agents during service.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the previous VA medical opinions did not adequately address the aggravation prong of secondary service connection and thus required additional examination and opinion.
- Claimed conditions
- varicose veins, peripheral arterial disease (PAD)
- How they argued it
- Secondary to another service-connected condition
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- February 20, 2026
- Citation
- 26002389
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 26002389.
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 Veteran's service connection claims for coronary artery disease, atherosclerosis, peripheral vascular disease, varicose veins, and irritable bowel syndrome are remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding secondary service connection.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inextricably intertwined issues of service connection for chronic venous insufficiency and an increased rating for varicose veins. The AOJ must adjudicate both claims, request an addendum opinion from a VA examiner, and readjudicate the issue in light of all evidence.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to errors in duty to assist and insufficient examination, as well as new evidence from the PACT Act. The Veteran's current DVT may be related to a motor vehicle accident during service, and there is no direct evidence of its cause. A VA examination will be conducted to address these issues.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a failure to provide a VA examination in connection with the service connection claim for varicose veins. The Veteran is presumed to have been exposed to toxic exposure risk activity during his Gulf War service, and there may be a nexus between his varicose veins and this exposure.
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.