BVA Case 12-3739: Skin
BVAReal Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · · CHEN
Conditions Claimed
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
SkinDiabetesEyeRadiculopathy
Why It Was Decided This Way
After twice remanding for development of the record, the Board concluded that there was insuffi- cient evidence to support Mr.
Because this appeal dis- putes only application of law to fact, and the Veterans Court did not otherwise misinterpret the benefit of the doubt doctrine, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
In this case, however, the Board determined that Mr.
Accordingly, the Board found his claims were unsubstantiated and the evidence weighed against a finding of service connection.
Thompson appealed to the Veterans Court, argu- ing that that the Board should have applied the benefit of the doubt doctrine because evidence of exposure met the requirement of 38 U.
Section 5107(b) states: “When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.
Conversely, when the preponder- ance of the evidence weighs against the claim, “[the Board] necessarily has determined that the evidence is not ‘nearly equal’ or ‘too close to call,’ and the benefit of the doubt rule therefore has no application.
The Veter- ans Court reviewed the Board’s fact findings for clear error and affirmed the Board’s determination that the benefit of the doubt rule did not apply.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
No Nexus|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →