Citation Nr: 21003741 Decision Date: 01/22/21 Archive Date: 01/22/21 DOCKET NO. 11-03 874 DATE: January 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating higher than 10 percent for glaucoma prior to August 25, 2008, and from October 1, 2008 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1982 to July 1992. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2009 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In July 2012, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript is of record. In January 2014, September 2017, and August 2019, the Board remanded the case for further development. The record reflects that the Veteran received a letter indicating that she could request a virtual tele-hearing instead of waiting for a travel board hearing. Upon further review, the Veteran does not have a pending hearing request. The Veteran provided testimony in a hearing with a Veterans Law Judge on July 24, 2012. The transcript of that hearing is of record. 1. Entitlement to a rating higher than 10 percent for glaucoma prior to August 25, 2008, and from October 1, 2008 is remanded. Unfortunately, the Board finds that a remand is necessary. The Veteran’s case was last remanded to obtain updated treatment records and a VA examination. The request development has not been completed. The August 2019 Board remand directed the RO to specifically obtain the scanned notes from the Center for Sight of Northeast Kansas that were attached to VA treatment records. The April 2011 and June 2011 treatment records indicated that a fee-based consult was conducted on June 22, 2011, and a copy was scanned into the record. While the RO associated the same April 2011 and June 2011 treatment records that documented the Center for Sight notes, it does not appear that the Center for Sight consult was obtained. The Board notes that in December 2019 the Veteran reported that she never went to or received any treatment from that facility. However, it appears that the Veteran’s files in VistA imaging were not obtained on remand. The July 2014 VA examiner took pictures of the Veteran’s eyes to document the appearance of the bleb on the right eye. While the examiner found there was no disfigurement due to the bleb, the examiner included photographs and specifically stated that the cosmetic appearance was in the opinion of the viewer. These images are not included in the claims file. The Board notes that the February 2018 VA examiner indicated there was a gross distortion of the eyelids due to the right eye bleb. The Board finds that on remand the VistA images should be associated with the Veteran’s record. A remand by the Board confers on the Veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Therefore, the Board is remanding the case for compliance with the August 2019 Remand directives. Should it be determined that the June 2011 consult report is unavailable or does not exist and further attempts to obtain the documents would be futile, then the finding should be documented in the claims file by a formal finding of unavailability. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from July 2020 to the present. Further, all records related to the Veteran’s eyes which have been stored in VistA Imaging since 2008 must be obtained, to specifically include the Center for Sight of Northeast Kansas consult dated June 22, 2011, photographs associated with the July 2014 VA examination, and all eye charts. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Kass, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.