Citation Nr: 1324908	
Decision Date: 08/06/13    Archive Date: 08/13/13

DOCKET NO.  10-37 984	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix, Arizona


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for a bilateral eye disability.


REPRESENTATION

Veteran represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Veteran and Spouse


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Jennifer R. White, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1956 to November 1959.

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Phoenix, Arizona.

In November 2010, the Veteran testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  A transcript of that proceeding is of record.

Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002).

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required.


REMAND

The Veteran and his representative contended during his November 2010 hearing that his most recent VA examination, dated June 2008, was insufficient and did not appropriately detail the Veteran's current bilateral eye disability.  

The Board initially notes that the results of field of vision testing must be recorded on a standard Goldmann chart, and the Goldmann chart must be included with the examination report.  38 C.F.R. § 4.77(a)  (2012).  There is no record of field of vision testing included with the copy of the June 2008 VA examination report.  Additionally, the most recent VA examination is more than five years old.  The Veteran is entitled to a new VA examination when there is evidence that the condition has worsened since the last examination.  Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (1995).  

The Veteran's most recent VA eye examination was conducted in June 2008, and the evidence indicates that his disability has worsened in severity.  See Proscelle v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 629 (1992) (the Veteran is competent to provide an opinion that his disability has worsened).  Therefore, the Veteran should be provided a VA examination to determine the current severity of his eye disability.

Ongoing medical records should also be obtained.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(c) (West 2002); see also Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992) (VA treatment records are in constructive possession of the agency, and must be obtained if the material could be determinative of the claim).

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  Expedited handling is requested.)

1.  Obtain and associate with the claims file any pertinent records adequately identified by the Veteran, including any ongoing medical records from the Pheonix VAMC.

2.  Afford the Veteran a VA eye examination.  All indicated tests and studies should be conducted. 

The examiner should determine and record the central visual acuity of both eyes and determine the visual fields of both eyes using Goldmann Perimeter Chart testing with the measurements provided for all relevant quadrants. The completed Goldmann chart must be included with the examination report. 

The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be considered in formulating any opinions.

3.  Then, the RO or the AMC should readjudicate the claim.  If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the Veteran's satisfaction, the Veteran and the representative, if any, should be furnished a supplemental statement of the case and provided an appropriate opportunity to respond before the claims folder is returned to the Board for further appellate action.

The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



_________________________________________________
JAMES A. MARKEY
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).