93 Decision Citation: BVA 93-09815

 Y93 
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C.  20420

DOCKET NO.        91-49 780       )    DATE
                  )
                  )
                  )

THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for a right eye disability.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:  Disabled American Veterans

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

H. N. Schwartz, Counse

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from January 1943 to December
1945.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals on appeal
from an October 1990 rating decision from the Baltimore,
Maryland, Regional Office.  Subsequently, the case was referred
to the St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office (hereinafter RO).
A notice of disagreement was dated in July 1991.  A statement of
the case was issued in September 1991.  A substantive appeal was
received in September 1991.  The case was received at the Board
in November 1991, and docketed in December 1991.  The veteran's
representative, Disabled American Veterans, entered additional
written argument in March 1992.  In July 1992, the Board remanded
the case to the regional office.  A supplemental statement of the
case was issued in August 1992.  The case was returned to the
Board and received in February 1993.  In March 1993 the case was
redocketed and forwarded to the veteran's representative.  That
organization submitted additional written argument that same
month.

REMAND

In July 1992, the Board of Veterans' Appeals determined that VA
Manual M21-1 constituted the functional equivalent of evidence.
The Board reopened the claim for service connection and returned
the case for further adjudication by the regional office.
Although the RO readjudicated the case in August 1992, the rating
decision made few references to the actual service medical
records and no reference to the provisions of M21-1.  It was
specifically noted in the remand that the agency of original
jurisdiction was to review the guidance provided by VA Manual
M21-1.  Because this was not accomplished, the case must again be
remanded.

On behalf of the veteran, it has been alleged that the initial
rating decision denying service connection for a right eye
disability was clearly and unmistakably erroneous.  This issue
has not been the subject of a supplemental statement of the case.

The Board believes that further action is warranted.  Therefore,
the case is REMANDED for the following:

1.  The agency of original jurisdiction must
specifically adjudicate whether the initial
rating decision denying service connection
for right eye pathology was clearly and
unmistakably erroneous.  In addition, a
specific supplemental statement of the case
addressing the issue must be provided.

2.  The originating agency should have the
file reviewed by an ophthalmologist.  The
examiner is to be made aware of the
provisions of M21-l, Part IV, 7.09.  The
examiner should detail the diopter change
between entrance and separation, and
formulate an opinion regarding the reason
for the decrease in visual acuity from
20/200 to light perception only.

3.  The agency of original jurisdiction must
consider the provisions of M21-1, Part IV,
7.09 (March 17, 1992).  More specifically,
the agency of original jurisdiction must
consider the provisions of
paragraph 7.09(b)(1).  Any opinion must be
supported by objective evidence or
discussion.

4.  The agency of original jurisdiction must
prepare a complete rating decision which
addresses all the evidence of record, both
old and new.  See Manio v. Derwinski,
1 Vet.App. 140 (1991).

The agency of original jurisdiction should then review the claim.
If, upon completion of the above action, the claim remains
denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance
with all requisite appellate procedures.  No action on the
veteran's part is required until he receives further notice.

BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C.  20420

     URSULA R. POWELL                  PAUL M. SELFON, M.D.

LAWRENCE M. SULLIVAN

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals.  This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board
on the merits of your appeal.  57 Fed. Reg. 4126 (1992) (to be
codified as 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b)).