BVA Case 23-2641: Back

Therefore, [his] skin condition is at least as likely as not related to his military service.

In August 2018,the Board remanded the appellant's claims,finding that although the January 2014 VA examiner had provided positive nexus opinions,those opinions were based 1 Tinea versicolor is a common,chronic,usually symptomless infection of the stratum corneum of the skin .

With respect to the appellant's skin condition,the Board noted that the examiner indicated that the appellant had sought treatment in service and was misdiagnosed then with tinea versicolor,but the Board found that there is no evidence the [appellant] sought treatment during service for skin symptoms such as a rash, [t]he separation examination also showed a normal skin examination,except for 'PFB,' which is a medical abbreviation for pseudofolliculitis barbae, and [t]here is no service treatment record indicating the [appellant]was diagnosed with tinea versicolor.

at 547-90,but the Board in July 2020 found that the examiner failed to provide adequate rationale for his negative nexus opinions,R.

In March 2022,the Board found the pes planus opinion inadequate because the physician impermissibly relied on the absence of medical evidence,failed to address the appellant's lay statements,and recorded the aggravation opinion under the direct service connection portion of the examination report.

There is no nexus [to]service, including as due to sun or heat exposure,or the other exposures specified above.

Appellant Regarding pes planus,the appellant argues that the Board erred by failing to provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases for rejecting [the]favorable January 2014 VA medical opinion in apparently concluding that his condition had not worsened in service.

He contends that the Board failed to explain why corroborating [service medical records]were necessary to support the VA examiner's opinion and why [his own]lay reports to the examiner did not suffice to support the opinion.