Citation Nr: 18147944
Decision Date: 11/06/18	Archive Date: 11/06/18

DOCKET NO. 14-25 369A
DATE:	November 6, 2018

REMANDED
Entitlement for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.
Entitlement for service connection for tinnitus is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran served on active duty from September 1970 to February 1972. From February 1972 to February 2000, the Veteran served in the U.S. Army Reserves. 
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2011 Rating Decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. 
The Veteran appeared before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in a June 2018 hearing. A transcript is of this proceeding is associated with the claims file. 
The Veteran contends that he should be entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. He argues that his claim was denied based on his DD-214 that incorrectly reflects his duty as a personnel clerk, while in fact he served in this capacity for only three hours a day and the rest of the day as a border control and combat engineer, armed escort, and perimeter guard.
The Veteran served in Vietnam as an engineer commander. Moreover, the Veteran testified during a June 2018 Board hearing that he was exposed to acoustic traumas during service. Therefore, the Board acknowledges noise exposure and also notes that the RO had conceded noise exposure based on the Veteran’s military specialty assignment. 
However, evidence indicates that there may be outstanding relevant VA treatment records.  Any VA treatment records are within VA’s constructive possession, and are considered potentially relevant to the issues on appeal.  In July 2018, the RO uploaded VA medical records into the file.  While pages 1-23 were uploaded correctly, pages 24-294 were blank pages with the phrase “please wait while Onenote loads this printout.” 
Furthermore, in October 2018, the RO received additional millitary records for the Veteran, including audiograms performed in 1970 and 1972.  Both VA examiners commented on the lack of active duty audiograms when providing their opinions.  Since additional military records are now in the file, an addendum opinion must be obtained.
The matters are REMANDED for the following action:
1. Obtain a complete copy of the VA treatment records the RO uploaded in July 2018, to include all records from pages 24-294.  Since the prior CAPRI records in the file were from December 2010, it appears records from that date until July 2018 need to be obtained.
2. DO NOT schedule the following examination until all VA records are updated.
3. Schedule the Veteran for an audiological examination.  The examiner should provide an opinion regarding whether the Veteran’s hearing loss and tinnitus are at least as likely as not related to his presumed exposure to acoustic traumas during service.  The examiner should consider the service records recently added to the file, which include audiograms from 1970 and 1972.  The examiner should also expressly address the June 2018 opinion the Veteran submitted and the role, if any, the Veteran’s post-service noise exposure played in the development of his hearing loss and/or tinnitus. 
 
MICHELLE L. KANE
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	C. Lee, Associate Counsel