Citation Nr: 22014288
Decision Date: 03/12/22	Archive Date: 03/12/22

DOCKET NO. 16-13 013
DATE: March 12, 2022

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for an eye disability is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from July 1974 to June 1978, from February 1982 to May 1984, and from July 1986 to April 1990.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2014 rating decision.  The case was most recently remanded for additional development in November 2021.

The November 2021 remand included instructions to obtain an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's diagnosed eye disabilities and to schedule a VA examination "only if necessary."  A January 2022 supplemental statement of the case noted that a contract examiner had attempted to schedule the Veteran for an examination but that he had refused the examination.  The examination request notes that the entire examination scheduling request was cancelled at the Veteran's request.  No additional information was provided as to any communication with the Veteran nor as to the basis for any determination that the requested opinions could not be provided without an in-person examination.  

A remand confers on a veteran or other claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).  Additional development is required in this case.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

Obtain an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's diagnosed eye disabilities.  Schedule a VA examination only if necessary.  An explanation must be provided if it is determined that an in-person examination is necessary for adequate opinions.

The examiner is asked to provide an opinion as to whether each diagnosed eye disability is at least as likely as not related to service.  In so opining, the examiner must address the eye disorders diagnosed at the Veteran's November 2014 VA examination: lacrimal gland and lid disorders (other than ptosis or anatomic loss), cataract and other lens conditions, and glaucoma and also dry syndrome and ectropion of eyelid as found in the VA treatment records.

The examiner is asked to consider and address the Veteran's service, including his MOS of vehicle operator, heavy equipment operator and organizational automotive mechanic and experience as a rifle marksman. 

 

MICHAEL A. HERMAN

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	T. Douglas

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.