Citation Nr: 22013200 Decision Date: 03/08/22 Archive Date: 03/08/22 DOCKET NO. 16-49 722 DATE: March 8, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1151 for left eye blindness is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1956 to September 1958. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2016 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In October 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) via a virtual hearing; a transcript of the hearing is of record. This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900 (c); 38 U.S.C. § 7107 (a)(2). Entitlement to compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1151 for left eye blindness is remanded. The Veteran seeks compensation under 38 U.S.C. 1151 for left eye blindness. By way of factual history, the Veteran described undergoing an eye operation at a VAMC in Hampton, Virginia, but needing to be rushed to a private hospital called Norfolk General Hospital in the middle of the surgery to correct an issue that occurred during the eye surgery. See Hearing Transcript pg. 3. After being discharged from Norfolk General Hospital, the Veteran underwent further eye treatment at a VAMC and was prescribed three different types of eye drops. See Hearing Transcript pg. 5. The Veteran reported having greater issues with his eyesight and resultingly going to a different VAMC. After examination, the Veteran testified that he was informed by a VA examiner that the eye drops he was prescribed "killed the optic nerve." Upon hearing this news, the Veteran testified that he decided it would be best if he went to private specialist, who ultimately confirmed that his eyesight was declining due to the eye drop medication prescribed by the VA. In a March 2015 Statement in Support of Claim, the Veteran reported being rushed to Norfolk General Hospital during his cataract surgery at Hampton VAMC. September 2016 VA Form 9 notes the Veteran's report of receiving many years of treatment, specifically private treatment, from a Dr. Michael Steiner and Dr. Sheppard from Virginia Eye Care Consultants. The Board notes that the private records noted above are not in the claims file. As VA has a duty to assist, remand is warranted to attempt to retrieve the Veteran's private medical records. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records and associate the same with the Veteran's claims folder. 2. Undertake appropriate development to obtain any private treatment records identified by the Veteran not already of record, to include any and all records from Norfolk General Hospital, Dr. Michael Steiner, and Dr. Sheppard from Virginia Eye Care Consultants. The Veteran's assistance should be requested as needed. All obtained records should be associated with the evidentiary record. If the AOJ cannot obtain records identified by the Veteran, a notation to that effect should be inserted in the file. The Veteran is to be notified of unsuccessful efforts in this regard, in order to allow him the opportunity to obtain and submit those records for VA review. Cynthia M. Bruce Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Russell, Tangela 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.