Citation Nr: 18143576 Decision Date: 10/19/18 Archive Date: 10/19/18 DOCKET NO. 18-02 642 DATE: October 19, 2018 ORDER New and material evidence having been received, the claim of service connection for a lung condition is reopened. REMANDED Service connection for a lung condition is remanded. An initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.   DECISION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1956 to February 1959. The case is on appeal from a January 2017 rating decision. In July 2018, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing. The record was held open for 60 days, however, no additional evidence was submitted. The Board notes that the January 2017 rating decision also denied service connection for a back disorder. The Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) in regard to such claim as well as the claims on appeal in February 2017. Thereafter, in September 2017, the RO granted the Veteran service connection for lumbosacral strain with degenerative arthritis of the spine. As the Veteran has been granted service connection for a back disability, this claim has been granted in full. Therefore, it is not before the Board. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim of service connection for a lung condition. By a May 1959 rating decision, a claim of service connection for cough and chest pains was denied. Thereafter, in February 1996, the Veteran filed a claim of service connection for a bronchial condition. The RO denied reopening a pulmonary condition claim in a January 1997 rating decision. He then filed a claim of service connection for a lung disability in March 2011. The RO again denied reopening a lung condition claim in a May 2012 rating decision. The Veteran was notified of the decision by letter later that month, which was mailed to the then current mailing address of record. Subsequently, nothing further regarding the claim was received until the present claim of service connection for a lung problem. No new evidence or notice of disagreement was received by VA within one year of the issuance of the May 2012 rating decision. As the Veteran did not appeal the decision, that rating decision is final. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.302, 20.1103. Although service connection was originally denied in regard to cough and chest pain and the Veteran is now specifically claiming a lung condition, the claim before the Board is not a new claim because it affects the same organ of the body and consists of overlapping symptoms with the Veteran’s prior claim. See Velez v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 199 (2009). Thus, new and material evidence is needed to reopen such claim. The Board finds that new and material evidence has been submitted so that the previously denied claim of service connection for a lung problem is reopened. See 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). See also Dr. S. L.’s March 2017 medical opinion; July 2018 Board hearing testimony. The reopened claim is further addressed in the remand section. REASONS FOR REMAND Service connection for a lung condition. The Veteran contends that he has a chronic lung condition due to his military service. In this regard, in an April 2017 correspondence, he reported experiencing breathing problems during service. He also reported being advised to seek treatment for this condition after discharge. He further reported that a VA physician told him in March 1959 that he would develop lung problems when he got older. Thereafter, during the July 2018 Board hearing, the Veteran reported that he had onset of a fungal condition in his lungs during service. He also reported being treated for a lung condition during service. The Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) show that he was treated for a condition noted as “TB.” His January 1959 separation examination does not note any relevant conditions. As noted above, the Veteran filed a claim of service connection for cough and chest pain shortly after discharge in March 1959. He was afforded a VA examination in regard to this claim in April 1959. During the examination, the Veteran reported experiencing pains in his chest and recurrent, severe coughing. The examiner reported that a chest x-ray showed clear lung fields. The examiner found that there was no evidence of pulmonary pathology. The record contains the Veteran’s post-service VA treatment records from 1994 until the present. These records reflect that the Veteran has frequently sought treatment for chronic coughing and shortness of breath. During VA treatment in April 2006, a VA registered nurse noted the Veteran has a history of chronic bronchitis. In April 2017, the Veteran submitted a letter written by a VA physician in March 2017. The physician reported that the Veteran is her patient and that she evaluated him in regard to his respiratory condition. She reported that a review of the Veteran’s medical records show that he has a chronic respiratory condition that dates to his military service in the 1950’s. The physician explained that imaging of the Veteran’s chest showed a granuloma that suggests the possibility of exposure to coccidioidomycosis or other fungal infection. She further explained that the Veteran trained near a location where such fungus is found during service around the time his respiratory problems began. In light of this information and the reopening of the claim, the Board finds that a VA examination is warranted for the claim. An initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran also contends that his service-connected bilateral hearing loss should have an initial compensable rating. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in regard to this disability in November 2016. However, the Veteran reported during the July 2018 Board hearing that his hearing has worsened since such examination. Thus, the Veteran should be afforded a new VA examination to assess the current extent and severity of his bilateral hearing loss. See Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997). This claim is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination in connection with the lung condition claim. First, the examiner should identify the Veteran’s current lung condition(s). Then, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether any identified lung condition had its onset during, or is otherwise related to, the Veteran’s active service. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D. Jimerfield, Associate Counsel