Citation Nr: 18132002
Decision Date: 09/05/18	Archive Date: 09/05/18

DOCKET NO. 16-01 764
DATE:	September 5, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for vision loss is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran had active service from May 1978 to March 1981.
This case comes before the Board of Veteran’s Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).
1. Vision Loss  
The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for vision loss.
The Veteran asserts that his blurred vision and floaters are related to his military service. He submitted a statement from his mother in June 2015 indicated that the Veteran has blurred vision since 1982.  
A January 2012 VA treatment record documented that the Veteran complained of floaters and blurred vision since 1985. The examiner indicated that the Veteran would be scheduled for an ophthalmology consult. A June 2012 VA treatment record indicated that an ophthalmology consult was requested however the records showed that the Veteran was a “no show” for the appointment.
The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination in relation to his vision loss claim.  Pursuant to McClendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006), and given the above, the Board finds that a VA examination is necessary to clarify whether the Veteran has a current vision loss disability related to his active duty service.
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Obtain updated VA treatment records. 
2. After completing the above development, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to address the etiology of any current disability manifested by vision loss. All necessary tests should be conducted. The claims file must be sent to the examiner for review.
a. The examiner should first identify all disabilities manifested by vision loss. 
b.  Then, for each identified disability other than refractive error, the examiner should indicate whether it is as least as likely as not (50 percent probability or more) that it is related to the Veteran’s active duty service.  
(Continued on the next page)
 
A complete rationale should accompany any opinion provided.
 
K. J. ALIBRANDO
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	S. Baxter, Associate Counsel