Citation Nr: 21072428
Decision Date: 12/03/21	Archive Date: 12/03/21

DOCKET NO. 11-22 243
DATE: December 3, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a left eye condition, claimed as blindness-left eye is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service in the United States Army from August 1970 to February 1972.

In September 2020, the Board issued a decision finding, in pertinent part, that entitlement to service connection for a left eye condition, claimed as blindness-left eye was denied. In July 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), vacated and remanded the matter for further development.

Entitlement to service connection for a left eye condition, claimed as blindness-left eye is remanded.

In the July 2021 JMPR, it was noted that the Board relied on a May 2019 VA examination and accompanying opinion that was misstated. Indeed, it was noted that "the Veteran's visual acuity has remained stable since his August 1970 induction examination', however, the actual opinion stated that the Veteran's acuity "has remained the same during service and was not aggravated during service." However, this appears to be in contradiction to findings in his August 1970 Report of Medical examination and subsequent May 2009 examination. Accordingly, a remand is required for an additional examination and opinion.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his left eye condition.  The examiner must review the claims file.

The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following:

Is it at least as likely as not that any pre-existing visual disability was aggravated (permanently worsened beyond its natural progression) by the Veteran's service?

Is it at least as likely as not that any visual disability was aggravated (permanently worsened beyond its natural progression) by the Veteran's service-connected disabilities, to include diabetes mellitus?

The Board directs the examiners attention to the Veteran's vision measurements in both his August 1970 Report of Medical examination and subsequent May 2009 examination.

A rationale should be given for any opinion provided.  If an opinion cannot be made without resort to mere 

 

speculation, this must also be fully explained.

 

 

L. M. BARNARD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. A. Elliott II, 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.