Citation Nr: 18158958
Decision Date: 12/19/18	Archive Date: 12/18/18

DOCKET NO. 11-00 319A
DATE:	December 19, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for an eye disorder, claimed as vision problems, is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from July 1999 to December 1999, and from May 2007 to May 2008. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2009 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 
The Board has broadened and recharacterized the claim of service connection for central serous retinopathy with peripheral vision loss as entitlement to service connection for an eye disorder. 
Entitlement to service connection for an eye disorder, claimed as vision problems, is remanded.
The Veteran contends that he developed an eye disorder while in active service; specifically, the Veteran asserts that, while deployed in Iraq in September 2007, his vision became blurry and he had difficulty seeing at distances. 
In August 2008, the Veteran was diagnosed with central serous retinopathy. 
In January 2009, a VA examiner opined that the prior diagnosis of central serous retinopathy is not consistent with the pathology, and that the Veteran’s peripheral vision loss is suggestive of functional vision loss. The examiner did not provide an opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s vision loss, and suggested a 
re-evaluation of the Veteran’s retinal pathology. Accordingly, the Board finds that the January 2009 VA examination is incomplete. 
The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should schedule the Veteran for a 
VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed eye disorders.
This matter is REMANDED for the following actions:
1. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from November 2018 to the present.
2. After completing directive #1, schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed eye disorders. The examiner is asked to review the virtual file, including this Remand, to become familiar with the relevant medial history related to the Veteran’s eye disorders. The examiner is to address: 
(a.) Identify all eye disorders that are currently present (or present from any time from November 13, 2008, to the present). 
(b.) Whether it is at least as likely as not (probability of 50 percent or more) that any diagnosed eye disorder had its onset in or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s periods of active service. Additionally, the examiner should determine the etiology of the Veteran’s blurred vision.
A comprehensive rationale for all opinions is to be provided. All pertinent evidence, including both lay and medical, should be considered; the Veteran’s lay statements regarding his in-service visions problems are to be considered and addressed. If an opinion cannot be given without resorting to speculation, the examiner should explain why and state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training).
 
Paul Sorisio
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	D. Han, Associate Counsel