Citation Nr: 21064515 Decision Date: 10/20/21 Archive Date: 10/20/21 DOCKET NO. 14-07 276 DATE: October 20, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for an eye disability (claimed as glaucoma secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II) is denied. FINDING OF FACT The weight of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has an eye disability that is proximately due to, or aggravated by, an event, injury, or other occurrence during active service, to include being the result of, or aggravated by, another service-connected disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for an eye disability (claimed as glaucoma secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II), to include as secondary to another service-connected disability, have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION Entitlement to service connection for an eye disability (claimed as glaucoma secondary to diabetes mellitus, type II) The Veteran had active service from May 1960 to June 1967. This matter returns to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) following a July 2021 Board remand for additional development. A remand by the Board confers on the Veteran, as a matter of law, the right to substantial compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). In July 2021 the Board directed that a VA examination be obtained that addressed medical evidence showing diagnoses of choroidal neovascularization with subretinal fibrosis and hard exudate. As discussed further below, a VA examination was obtained in August 2021 that addressed this evidence. Accordingly, the Board finds that there has been substantial compliance with its July 2021 remand directives and adjudication of the Veteran's claim is appropriate. In a March 2010 written statement to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) the Veteran contended that he suffers from an eye disability characterized as glaucoma secondary to service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II. In a March 2013 written statement to VA the Veteran characterized his claimed eye disability as diabetic retinopathy. At a September 2015 Board hearing the Veteran contended that he had suffered problems with his left eye from the time of in-service foreign body injuries onward. Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Establishing service connection generally requires (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. To establish secondary service connection, a Veteran must provide evidence of (1) a current, non-service-connected disability, (2) a current service-connected disability, and (3) evidence that the non-service-connected disability is either (i) proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disability or (ii) aggravated (increased in severity) beyond its natural progression by a service-connected disability. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; Allen v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 439, 446 (1995); 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. A July 1961 note in the Veteran's service treatment records reflects treatment for "foreign body in left eye." 2/06/0009, STR Medical, p. 22. Private medical records dated May 2007 and March 2008 reflect diagnoses of age-related macular degeneration, choroidal neovascularization with subretinal fibrosis, cataracts, and left eye early gliotic scarring. 7/10/2012, Medical Treatment Record Non-Government Facility, p. 17; 6/06/2012, Third Party Correspondence, p. 2. A January 2016 VA examination reflects diagnoses of choroidal neovascularization, left eye; bilateral macular degeneration; and bilateral cataracts. 01/04/2016, C&P Exam, p. 1. An April 2021 VA problem list reflects a diagnosis of exudative macular degeneration. 8/05/2021, CAPRI, p. 5. There is no evidence of record reflecting diagnoses of glaucoma or diabetic retinopathy. An October 2008 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's cataracts were more likely than not related to advancing age and stated that there was no evidence of diabetic retinopathy or other ophthalmic complications of diabetes. 10/26/2008, VA Examination, p. 4. The examiner stated that the Veteran's macular degeneration was more likely than not related to advancing age, and that the scarring of the left eye represented sequelae of the exudative macular degeneration of the left eye. Id. In June 2021 a VA examiner opined that the Veteran's macular degeneration was age-related and not due to any injury sustained during service. The examiner stated that retinal degeneration is the result of the "complex interplay of risk factors (not including corneal trauma) with an increasing prevalence with age." 6/04/2021, C&P Exam, p. 2. The examiner also opined that the Veteran's age-related macular degeneration (ARMD) was not proximately due to his service-connected diabetes, stating that there was no research to support a finding of a nexus between the two. In an August 2021 addendum opinion, a different examiner opined that the Veteran's choroidal neovascularization was the result of the Veteran's age-related macular degeneration, citing both the opinion of the Veteran's treating providers and independently concluding that the record does not reflect any other cause or factor that would result in choroidal neovascularization. The examiner listed the causes of choroidal neovascularization: ARMD, pathologic myopia, ocular histoplasmosis, eye trauma, angioid streaks, severe ocular inflammation, and eye trauma. The August 2021 examiner discussed the Veteran's in service ocular injury but noted that ocular examination was normal at the time. The examiner also concluded that no other causal factor for choroidal neovascularization is reflected in the record. The examiner stated that diabetes mellitus is not a cause of choroidal neovascularization, and that there is nothing in this specific case to suggest that it is. In light of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the weight of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has an eye disability that is proximately due to, or aggravated by, an event, injury, or other occurrence during active service, to include being the result of, or aggravated by, another service-connected disability. Accordingly, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for an eye disability are not met, and the same is hereby denied. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Sametshaw, Eric C. 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.