BVA Case 24-3612: Back

In the April 16,2024,decision on appeal,the Board denied the veteran's claims.

Despite acknowledging a current eye disability because the veteran wear[s]glasses and has a condition of at least one eye, the Board found that the veteran's poor visual acuity in his left eye was documented on his entrance examination and therefore constituted a preexisting condition.

The Board noted that the veteran's STRs contain[ed]no record of treatment,injury,or complaints related to his eyes and that [t]he only evidence that [his]eyes got worse or were otherwise affected by his service [wa]s the [v]eteran's testimony, which was not credible as related to his eyes.

Although he also testified vaguely to passing out,seeing white,and being briefly unable to see,before getting back up and continuing with a march, the Board found that this description of circumstances [wa]s not very specific to an eye condition and could be relating an experience [of]passing out due to any number of reasons.

may be associated with the [v]eteran's service, the Board found that the veteran had not satisfied the requirements to warrant providing a VA exam under McLendon v.

As to the claim for headaches,the Board found that the veteran had a current diagnosis but that the evidence does not show that the [v]eteran experienced an event, injury,or other circumstance during service to which this headache condition might be connected.

Thus,the Board concluded that [t]he lack of evidence that the [v]eteran manifested a belief that his headache condition began during his service prior to his submission of this claim was another reason for skepticism regarding the credibility of his assertions.

Finally,the Board found that the evidence was persuasively against a finding that the veteran's current sinus problems began during service and were otherwise related to service.