BVA decisions by condition

Chloracne: BVA grant rates and what wins

From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a chloracne issue in 528 decisions. It granted the chloracne issue in 10.8% of them, below the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 34.3%, and remanded it in 52.5%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 23.9% were granted.

Decisions

528

2017–2026

Granted

10.8%

All conditions: 19.4%

Granted on the merits

23.9%

Granted ÷ (granted + denied)

Remanded

52.5%

Denied: 34.3%

Chloracne outcomes by year

YearDecisionsGrantedDeniedRemanded
2018
63
9.5%36.5%50.8%
2019
63
11.1%31.7%55.6%
2020
81
6.2%34.6%53.1%
2021
50
14.0%44.0%42.0%
2022
65
12.3%27.7%56.9%
2023
67
6.0%25.4%67.2%
2024
53
18.9%30.2%50.9%

Evidence in granted and denied chloracne decisions

For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the chloracne issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Positive nexus opinion8051.9%16.1%+35.8 pts
Favorable VA exam7552.0%16.5%+35.5 pts
Private medical opinion14031.0%20.1%+10.8 pts
Claimed as secondary8716.0%24.9%−8.9 pts
Combat service8315.4%25.6%−10.2 pts
Lay statement39321.2%35.6%−14.3 pts
  • The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 71.9% of the decisions that granted chloracne.
  • The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 31.6% of grants and 14.9% of denials.

Negative evidence in the record

An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often chloracne was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.

In the recordDecisionsGranted when presentWhen absentDifference
Negative nexus opinion20919.6%27.8%−8.1 pts
Unfavorable VA exam33920.2%36.4%−16.1 pts

Why the Board granted or denied chloracne

Most common reasons in grants

  1. Current diagnosis established8
  2. Criteria for service connection met4
  3. Presumed exposure to herbicide agents2
  4. Conceded herbicide exposure in vietnam2
  5. Diagnosis of chloracne2

Most common reasons in denials

  1. No current diagnosis47
  2. Preponderance of the evidence against the claim20
  3. Current diagnosis established16
  4. Service records negative or silent16
  5. VA examiner: less likely than not related to service7
  6. No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis7
  7. No diagnosis of chloracne3
  8. Claim denied2

Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.

Recent chloracne decisions

Granted

Citation Nr. A26034529Steven D. Reiss · 2026

Chloracne affected intertriginous areas; Met criteria for 20 percent rating; Did not meet criteria for higher rating

Citation Nr. A26032767Jennifer Hwa · 2026

Presumptive service connection under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e); Chloracne manifested within one year of last exposure; Resolved doubt in Veteran's favor due to approximate balance of evidence

Citation Nr. A26022041Jimmy L. Bardin · 2026

Service connection for chloracne granted.; Related to in-service herbicide exposure.

Denied

Citation Nr. A26037058Ryan T. Kessel · 2026

VA examiner found no current diagnosis of chloracne.; Examiners opined porphyria cutanea tarda not related to service or TERA.; Lay statements were considered but given less weight than medical evidence.

Citation Nr. A26033419B.T. Knope · 2026

Persuasive weight of evidence against service connection; Lay statements not competent or credible; No nexus to service or TERA established

Citation Nr. 26003000Lesley A. Rein · 2026

No current diagnosis of skin disability during appeal period or proximate thereto.; No evidence of functional impairment affecting earning capacity.; Benefit of the doubt rule not applicable as evidence not in approximate balance.

Rules that apply to chloracne claims

Research your chloracne case

Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.

Open VA Law Explorer

How these numbers are calculated

  • Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a chloracne issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
  • “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
  • The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.