The VA granted service connection for residuals of a lacrimal canalicular repair of the left eye with epiphora, and assigned a 10 percent evaluation effective from August 30, 1995.
The deciding factor: The veteran's claim was originally awarded based on evidence showing that his left eye had residual epiphora following a surgical repair for lacrimal canalicular damage. The VA found no other service-connected conditions related to the disability and thus assigned the lowest possible evaluation under Diagnostic Code 6025.
- Claimed conditions
- epiphora, lacrimal canalicular repair
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 10%
- Decision date
- March 28, 2001
- Citation
- 0109237
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0109237.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the Veteran's claim for service connection for an eye disability, including conjunctivitis and other diagnosed conditions such as refractive amblyopia, Meibomian gland dysfunction, cataracts, epiphora, left myopic macular degeneration, and pinguecula. The AOJ is instructed to obtain etiology opinions regarding the Veteran's diagnosed eye disabilities.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate VA examination and opinion regarding service connection for conjunctivitis, bilateral watering eyes (epiphora), and their relationship to service-connected rhinitis and/or pinguecula.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's eye disabilities are remanded for a new VA medical opinion to determine if they are related to her active service, including the 1987 personal assault.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete compliance with previous requests for additional development. The Veteran's left eye disability is being reviewed again as there was not a thorough opinion on its etiology.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.