The Board has determined that the Veteran's chronic left eye disorder, including pigmentary glaucoma, was not incurred in or aggravated by active service and denied his claim for service connection.
The deciding factor: Competent medical opinions found no etiological link between the Veteran's inservice exposure to creosote fumes and his current condition, and concluded that the onset of his chronic left eye disorder is related to his eye anatomy and structure rather than any in-service event or exposure.
- Claimed conditions
- chronic left eye disorder, pigmentary glaucoma
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 14, 2011
- Citation
- 1110061
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 1110061.
What this means for you
A denial is a starting point, not the end of the road. You can see why this claim fell short — and, if you are still inside the one-year window, the appeal lanes that may remain open to you.
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 determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the YAG capsulotomy treatment was in fact conducted too early. The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded to obtain additional clarification from an appropriate medical professional.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the YAG capsulotomy treatment was in fact conducted too early. The Veteran's claim for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 is remanded to obtain additional clarification from an appropriate medical professional.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that the VA medical opinions are inadequate and as such, the RO should have obtained clarifying opinions regarding whether the Veteran's left eye condition was caused or aggravated by carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment, or similar instance of fault on the part of VA. The VA ophthalmologist did not address the private DBQ from 2019 and the timeline provided by the Veteran's treating optometrist.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for a chronic left eye disorder and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) due to incomplete development of medical opinions.
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.