Citation Nr: 1303545	
Decision Date: 02/01/13    Archive Date: 02/08/13

DOCKET NO.  12-04 390	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Louis, Missouri


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. 


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Matthew Blackwelder, Counsel


INTRODUCTION

The appellant had active duty training (ACDUTRA) from May to November 1962.

This matter is on appeal from the St. Louis, Missouri, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

The Board has not only reviewed the appellant's physical claims file, but also his file on the "Virtual VA" system to insure a total review of the evidence. 

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

In November 2010, the appellant filed a claim seeking service connection for tinnitus.  In the space allotted for disabilities being claimed, he wrote "Tinnitus result from firing 90mm."  On the DD-214, his MOS was listed as "armor crewman."  Given the specialty, it would be highly likely that he would have had noise exposure during his 6-month period of ACDUTRA.  However, at the time he sought treatment for tinnitus in 2008, he reported a 20+ year history of hearing loss, dating the onset to approximately 1988, some 20 years after service.  In addition, he reported farm machinery noise exposure and a family history of hearing loss.

While the appellant is competent to describe tinnitus, he is not competent to attribute it to a 6-month period of ACDUTRA in the 1960s, post-service noise exposure, or ascertain what, if any, part his family history plays.  Therefore, a medical opinion is needed.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following actions:

1.  Schedule the appellant for an examination to address the relationship, if any, between his complaints of tinnitus and his period of ACDUTRA in 1962.  

The claims folder must be made available to the examiner in conjunction with the examination.  Any testing deemed necessary should be performed.

Specifically, the examiner is requested to express an opinion as to the following:

* Does the record establish that it is at least as likely as not (i.e., probability of 50 percent) that the appellant's complaints related to tinnitus had their onset during or are related to a period of ACDUTRA in 1962?

* What effect, if any, does post-service noise exposure or family history of hearing loss have on his current complaints of tinnitus?

2.  Thereafter, the RO should re-adjudicate the issue on appeal.  If the benefits sought remain denied, the appellant and the representative should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC).  The SSOC must contain notice of all relevant actions taken on the claim for benefits, to include the applicable law and regulations considered pertinent to the issues as well as a summary of the evidence received since the issuance of the last SSOC.  An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response.  

3.  The case should then be returned to the Board, if in order.  The Board intimates no opinion as to the ultimate outcome of this case.  The appellant need take no action unless otherwise notified.  





The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



_________________________________________________
L. HOWELL
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).