Citation Nr: 18159310 Decision Date: 12/19/18 Archive Date: 12/18/18 DOCKET NO. 13-21 877 DATE: December 19, 2018 REMANDED The appeal for entitlement to service connection for bilateral eye disorders, to include retinal detachment of the right eye, bilateral cataracts, bilateral posterior vitreous detachments, peripheral retinal degeneration of the left eye, (claimed as residuals of acid burn injury) is remanded. The appeal for entitlement to service connection for tinea pedis is remanded. The appeal for an initial compensable evaluation for chronic maxillary sinusitis is remanded. The appeal for a compensable evaluation for allergic rhinitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1967 to December 1987. The claims on appeal were previously denied by the Board in July 2017. The Veteran then appealed the Board’s decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). The parties filed a Joint Motion for Remand, which was granted in June 2018. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral eye disorders (claimed as residuals of acid burn injury). Pursuant to the Joint Motion, the Board has again reviewed the evidence of record and finds that additional development is required. The March 2012 VA examiner did not address one of the Veteran’s current eye diagnoses – retinoschisis (identified in May 2014 private treatment record) – and did not adequately explain the basis for the negative nexus opinion regarding the remaining eye diagnoses. In this regard, the Board acknowledges that the examiner explained that there was no evidence of residuals of the acid burn and that none of the Veteran’s current ocular conditions were residuals of the acid burn to the right eye; however, the examiner did not explain the basis for the opinion or discuss whether the eye disorders could otherwise be related to service. The examiner also noted that the Veteran had severe constriction of the field of vision with the right eye secondary to a retinal detachment which occurred after service but the examiner did not address whether such retinal detachment was related to service. As discussed below, outstanding records must also be obtained. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinea pedis and higher ratings for chronic maxillary sinusitis and allergic rhinitis. The Veteran’s representative has informed the Board that there may be relevant, outstanding treatment records from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital regarding these claims. See December 2018 Informal Hearing Presentation. The Board observes that pursuant to its July 2017 remand regarding other claims not presently at issue, the AOJ requested outstanding treatment records from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital dated since June 2013. Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital responded to the request with a compact disc containing the records; however, the evidence indicates that the disc is not scannable. See August 2018 memorandum. The AOJ attempted to obtain the records again in October 2018 and a response from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital indicates that the requested information was provided; however, the documents once again were not scannable. See October 2018 memorandum. It appears that the AOJ may still be actively seeking the documents in question. Upon receipt of any documents from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital, the AOJ should conduct any additional development deemed necessary as a result of the records and then readjudicate the claims. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain scannable documents from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital, dated from June 2013 to the present. If neither hard copy nor scannable documents are available, obtain an affirmative statement to that effect from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital and inform the Veteran and his representative. 2. Seek another VA opinion regarding the relationship, if any, between the Veteran’s current eye disorders and service. The Board leaves it to the discretion of the examiner to determine whether another in-person examination is required. (a.) The examiner is asked to identify all eye disorders present at any point pertinent to the claim for service connection, to include retinoschisis (May 2014 private treatment record) as well as the eye disorders identified in the March 2012 VA examination (retinal detachment of the right eye, bilateral cataracts, bilateral posterior vitreous detachments, peripheral retinal degeneration of the left eye). (b.) For each disorder identified, the examiner is asked to opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to service. (c.) The examiner is asked to provide complete rationale for any opinion rendered. 3. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, to include association of any records from Camp Pendleton Naval Hospital, readjudicate the Veteran’s claims based on the entirety of the evidence. If any claim remains denied, issue the Veteran and his representative a supplemental statement of the case. Allow an appropriate period of time for response. V. Chiappetta Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Donna D. Ebaugh, Counsel