Citation Nr: 21041798
Decision Date: 07/10/21	Archive Date: 07/10/21

DOCKET NO. 18-26 991
DATE: July 10, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 40 percent for diabetic retinopathy with bilateral macular edema, glaucoma, and cataracts, bilateral, to include the propriety of the reduction from 60 percent, effective May 13, 2017, is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served honorably on active duty with the United States Army from July 1966 to July 1968, including overseas service in the Republic of Vietnam.

In February 2020, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file.

This matter was previously before the Board in August 2020, at which time it was remanded for additional development.  It has since returned to the Board for appellate consideration.  Regrettably, for the reasons discussed below, another remand is necessary.

In accordance with the Board's August 2020 remand instructions, additional VA treatment records were associated with the claims file.  These records show that there are treatment records that are available as scanned documents in VistA Imaging, but that have not been associated with the claims file and are therefore unavailable for review by the Board.  These records include the results of Humphrey Visual Field tests completed in August 2018 and March 2017.  The Board notes that it does not have access to VistA Imaging, so these records must be printed from VistA and uploaded/added to the Veteran's VBMS or Virtual VA file.  Remand is necessary to obtain these records, as they are relevant to the claim on appeal.

Additionally, the Board notes that its August 2020 remand directives requested that the AOJ attempt to obtain private treatment records associated with eye treatment the Veteran received through Scripps Health during the period on appeal.  In August 2020, the AOJ sent a letter to the Veteran seeking authorization to obtain any private treatment records associated with his claim.  The Veteran did not respond to the letter.  However, given that the Board is remanding the claim for additional development, the Veteran should be afforded another opportunity to provide copies of any private treatment records associated with his claim, or the authorization necessary for VA to obtain the records on his behalf

The matter is REMANDED for the following actions:

1. Obtain VA eye treatment records that have been scanned into VistA Imaging but are not associated with the Veteran's claims file, including the results of any Humphrey Visual Field tests completed in August 2018 and March 2017.  The Board reminds the AOJ that the Board does not have access to VistA Imaging, so these records must be printed from VistA and uploaded/added to the Veteran's VBMS or Virtual VA file.

2. Again ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for all private providers who have treated him for his eyes at any time during the appeal period, including from Scripps Health.  Make two requests for the authorized records from each identified provider, unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile.

3. Then, readjudicate the claim on appeal.  If the benefit sought remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) to the Veteran and his representative and return the case to the Board.

 

 

M. HYLAND

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	G. T. Raftery, 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.