The Veteran is already receiving a 90% schedular rating for bilateral optic atrophy, which adequately considers his overall eye disability. The loss of visual fields from March 6, 2008 to December 10, 2008 does not warrant an extraschedular evaluation.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's service-connected bilateral optic atrophy already contemplates severe impairment in earning capacity through a 90% schedular rating. The loss of visual fields from March 6, 2008 to December 10, 2008 is adequately addressed by the existing schedular criteria.
- Claimed conditions
- optic atrophy, loss of visual fields
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 90%
- Decision date
- November 29, 2011
- Citation
- 1143694
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 1143694.
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.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for a disability of the eyes, other than bilateral photophobia, as there was no evidence to support a nexus between the Veteran's eye conditions and his military service.
- Dismissed
The appeal for service connection for a bilateral eye disorder was withdrawn by the Veteran and is therefore dismissed.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran's claim for service connection for an eye disability, including blurry vision, optic atrophy, retinal artery occlusion, and retinal vascular occlusion as secondary to her service-connected Multiple Sclerosis and chronic fatigue syndrome is remanded due to a pre-decisional duty to assist error.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral eye disability other than photophobia, specifically whether it is due to an injury superimposed on his existing refractive error.
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.