Citation Nr: 21021934 Decision Date: 04/14/21 Archive Date: 04/14/21 DOCKET NO. 12-28 981 DATE: April 14, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for eye disorders, to include retinoschisis and pinguecula, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1967 to June 1987. This matter came before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veteran’s Law Judge during a July 2017 hearing. The transcript of the hearing is of record. Board decisions dated in November 2017, April 2019, October 2019, and December 2020 remanded the appeal for further development. Entitlement to service connection for eye disorders, to include retinoschisis and pinguecula, is remanded. It is the Veteran’s primary assertion that his retinoschisis is due to his service-connected diabetes mellitus (DM). As pointed out by the Board in the November 2017 remand decision, the Veteran had been diagnosed with multiple eye conditions. Thus, pursuant to Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 5 (2009), the claim was expanded to include all eye disorders. In an October 2019 Board remand, VA examination was requested to determine the etiology of any current eye disability, to include retinoschisis and cataracts. The requested VA examination was conducted in January 2020. In addition to the diagnoses of retinoschisis and cataracts, bilateral pinguecula was diagnosed. Service connection for cataracts was granted upon rating decision in June 2020 but claims for service connection for other eye disorder remained on appeal as such were distinct and separate disabilities from the now service-connected cataracts. The June 2020 addendum opinion addressed whether retinoschisis and pinguecula were likely due to DM. Rationales for the opinions were provided. However, as the examiner did not address whether retinoschisis was aggravated by the service-connected disability, the Board remanded the claim in December 2020 for additional examination which was conducted in January 2021. The additional eye disorder of pinguecula and whether such was aggravated by DM has not been addressed in the medical record. Although the Board regrets the additional delay, further development is necessary prior to adjudication of the claim on appeal. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain a new and appropriate VA opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s pinguecula. An in-person examination should only be requested if the examiner deems it to be necessary. The examiner should review the file and provide a complete rationale for all opinions expressed. The opinion should address whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s pinguecula was caused or aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected DM. In providing the opinion, the examiner should consider and discuss any lay statements of record, to include the Veteran’s statements regarding the onset and persistence of his symptoms. 2. If upon completion of the above action, the appeal remains denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Hal Smith, 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.