Citation Nr: 21068728 Decision Date: 11/12/21 Archive Date: 11/12/21 DOCKET NO. 17-37 930 DATE: November 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for retinitis pigmentosa is granted. INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from October 1980 to June 1981. In April 2021, the Veteran attended a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of that proceeding is of record. When this case was previously before the Board in April and August 2021, the above-noted issue was remanded for additional development. The case has since been returned for further appellate review. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Retinitis pigmentosa was not noted on examination conducted in connection with the Veteran's entrance into service. 2. The most probative evidence indicates retinitis pigmentosa first manifest in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW With the resolution of reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, retinitis pigmentosa was incurred in service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § § 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran contends that his retinitis pigmentosa began during active service. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Congenital and hereditary diseases (but not defects) are subject to service connection if they manifest in or are aggravated by service. See O'Bryan v. McDonald, 771 F.3d 1376, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (holding that not all congenital diseases exist prior to service simply because they are congenital or hereditary); see also Quirin v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 390, 394 (2009); Monroe v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 513, 515 (1993). VA's General Counsel has determined retinitis pigmentosa is a congenital "disease," as opposed to a congenital "defect," so it is subject to service connection if it manifests during service. VAOPGCPREC 67-90; VAOPGCPREC 11-99. The record shows the Veteran's eyes were noted to be normal at service entrance, apart from the need for corrective lenses. Service treatment records then show the Veteran experienced reduction in visual acuity and peripheral vision during service, as well as a loss of night vision. Following optometry evaluations at the Seymour Johnson Optometry Clinic and Womack Army Hospital, the Veteran was referred for a medical evaluation board (MEB) at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The MEB concluded the Veteran's retinitis pigmentosa began in 1981. The Veteran was examined for VA purposes in connection with his appeal in September 2021. Following examination, the examiner concluded the Veteran's retinitis pigmentosa was less likely than not caused by service. However, the examiner's rationale appears to have been simply based on the condition being congenital in nature. This plainly misunderstands the concept of service connection and is not accorded any probative weight. Conversely, the September 2021 examiner also found the Veteran's retinitis pigmentosa was indeed diagnosed in February 1981 while he was in active service. As set out above, direct service connection for retinitis pigmentosa may be established by showing in-service incurrence, which is consistent with the Veteran's reports of in-service symptoms and the service treatment records showing the onset of the disability. The evidence of record shows the Veteran continues to experience this disorder. Given the facts set out above, and the medical opinions identifying the onset of the condition in service, the Board concludes service connection for retinitis pigmentosa is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Fraser, 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.