Citation Nr: 22009119 Decision Date: 02/16/22 Archive Date: 02/16/22 DOCKET NO. 17-22 749 DATE: February 16, 2022 REMANDED Service connection for left eye disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in a May 2018 video conference hearing. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the file. The Board remanded the matter in October 2018 to afford the Veteran an examination to confirm all current diagnoses of an eye disability and to obtain an adequate opinion. The Board finds that the remand directives have not been substantially complied with, and an additional remand is required. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268. A VA examination was performed in April 2021 and an opinion provided. The VA examiner confirmed several eye disabilities to include dermatochalasis, pinguecula, nuclear sclerosis, dry eye syndrome, and corneal arcus. The April 2021 opinion is inadequate. It is conclusory and is based solely on the fact that the examiner deemed the disabilities "of recent etiology." As such, a remand is required to obtain an addendum opinion for the eye disabilities. Additionally, the examiner will be requested to consider the Veteran's contentions that he injured his eye as a result of an in-service fall. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should forward the Veteran's claims file to an appropriate VA examiner for an addendum opinion regarding the nature and etiology of his eye disabilities. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the addendum opinion. The claims file and a copy of this Remand must be made available to the reviewing examiner. The examiner shall indicate in the addendum report that the claims file was reviewed. The examiner should identify each eye disability found at any time during the appeal period. If an examination is performed and any previously diagnosed eye disability is not found on examination, the examiner should address the prior diagnoses of record and indicate whether they may have resolved or been misdiagnosed. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent) that the Veteran's eye disability, manifested during active service; or is otherwise related to an event, injury, or disease incurred during active service, to include his claimed in-service accident that injured his eye. The examiner must address each eye disability when providing his/her opinions and must address the Veteran's contentions regarding his claimed in-service treatment injury to his eye. The examiner is advised that the Veteran and his lay witnesses are competent to report observable symptoms. The examiner is further advised that the Veteran's service treatment records are unavailable, and that the mere absence of treatment records is not wholly dispositive as to whether the reported symptoms are credible. The examiner is asked to provide a complete a rationale for all opinions offered. 2. The AOJ should ensure that the addendum opinion conforms with the remand directives. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Talamantes, 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.