The Veteran's bilateral photorefractive keratectomy, claimed as cornea tears and dryness, has been manifested by severe symptoms including constant corneal tearing, intense pain, and dryness. The Board finds a 10 percent evaluation best represents his disability picture.
The deciding factor: The Veteran's eye disability causes significant impairment in visual acuity and daily activities due to corneal erosions, pain, and dryness, warranting the highest available non-compensable rating under DC 6035.
- Claimed conditions
- cornea tears, dry eyes
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 10%
- Decision date
- December 15, 2014
- Citation
- 1455024
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 1455024.
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 found that remand is needed for the Veteran's claims due to duty to assist errors, including clarification of periods of service and obtaining relevant records. The Veteran will be afforded new medical examinations for each claimed disability.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient medical opinion regarding whether the Veteran's dry eyes are related to service. The claim will be reviewed again with additional evidence.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a duty-to-assist error, specifically failing to obtain an opinion regarding whether the Veteran's current bilateral eye disability is related to service exposure to burn pits. The AOJ should obtain such an opinion.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a duty-to-assist error in obtaining an adequate medical opinion regarding the relationship between the Veteran's dry eyes and his service, particularly his exposure to toxins during service in the Persian Gulf.
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.