Citation Nr: 21072453 Decision Date: 12/03/21 Archive Date: 12/03/21 DOCKET NO. 17-17 941 DATE: December 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for open angle glaucoma, to include as secondary to service-connected diabetes mellitus, type II, and/or herbicide exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States October 1967 from to February 1970. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2016 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). By way of background, the Board previously denied reopening this claim for service connection in November 2018. However, the Veteran appealed the denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). The Court vacated and remanded the matter in September 2019, based on a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). In April 2020, the Board decided to reopen the claim but denied entitlement to service connection. The Veteran appealed this denial. Based on a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), the Court in July 2021 vacated the denial and remanded the matter of entitlement to service connection for open angle glaucoma for additional development. Specifically, the Court found that the Board had erred in failing to take reasonable efforts to obtain specific private treatment records from Dr. MI. Additionally, the Court found that the Board had failed to provide adequate reasons and bases when it did not address whether the Veteran's currently diagnosed glaucoma was caused by or related to his presumed exposure to herbicides in service. In correspondence received in September 2021, the Veteran included the medical records from Dr. MI that had been specifically identified in the JMPR and requested that it be remanded, or sent back, to the AOJ. Accordingly, the matter will be remanded in order that the AOJ might initially review the evidence provided. Furthermore, it appears that these records are in Spanish. Additionally, although certain other documents in the claims file have been translated from Spanish to English, certain other documents have not yet been translated. Translation matters are not normally remanded. But cases remanded to the San Juan, Puerto Rico regional office (RO) for other actions may include a remand order related to translation. Thus, on remand, the Spanish language documents on file should be translated. The JMPR found that the issue of entitlement to service connection based on presumed exposure to herbicide has been raised by the record. Specifically, the Veteran alleged that his disabilities were related to this exposure in an August 2011 statement. While the file contains medical opinions considering secondary service connection to diabetes mellitus, an opinion addressing a direct relationship between the glaucoma and presumed herbicide exposure has not yet been obtained. As such, remand is also warranted for this development to be undertaken. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Translate the Spanish language documents in the file, and associate those translations with the electronic record, including: (a.) Correspondence (Dr. MI medical records) received in September 2021. (b.) Medical Treatment Records received in November 2004. (c.) Medical Treatment Records received in July 2004. 2. Obtain a VA medical opinion to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's open angle glaucoma. The claims folder must be reviewed in conjunction with the examination. The examiner must opine as to whether the open angle glaucoma is at least as likely as not caused or aggravated by service, to include presumed herbicide exposure, or a service-connected disability, to include diabetes mellitus. 3. Adjudicate the claim on appeal considering all pertinent evidence, to include the medical records from Dr. MI and all evidence that was added to the claims file since the last adjudication in April 2020. 4. If any benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case. The case should then be returned to the Board for appellate review if otherwise in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S.P. Faris 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.