Citation Nr: 18156204 Decision Date: 12/07/18 Archive Date: 12/07/18 DOCKET NO. 14-43 428 DATE: December 7, 2018 ORDER The appeal of the issue of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. The appeal of the issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for hearing loss is dismissed. The appeal of the issue entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. REMANDED Service connection for a gastrointestinal disability, to include gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), is remanded. Service connection for a heart disability, to include thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), is remanded. Service connection for a low back disability, to include lumbar spine osteoarthritis, is remanded. Service connection for residuals of an in-service head injury, to include an eye disability, headaches, and/or fainting, is remanded. FINDING OF FACT At the August 2018 Board hearing, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran withdrew his appeal of the issues of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss, entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for tinnitus, and entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of a substantive appeal concerning the issues of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss, entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for tinnitus, and entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, are met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1943 to December 1945. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2014 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2018, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The issues on appeal have been recharacterized as reflected above.   1. The appeal of the issue of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. 2. The appeal of the issue of entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for hearing loss is dismissed. 3. The appeal of the issue entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. Withdrawal may be made in writing or on the record at a hearing by the Veteran or by an authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. The Veteran’s appeal included claims of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss, entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for tinnitus, and entitlement to an effective date prior to September 24, 2013 for the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. However, the Veteran and his representative expressly withdrew these issues from appellate consideration on the record at the August 2018 Board hearing. See Hearing Transcript at 2. As there is no allegation of error of fact or law for Board consideration on these issues, the Board does not have jurisdiction to consider the appeal of these matters, and they must be dismissed.  REASONS FOR REMAND 4. Service connection for a gastrointestinal disability, to include GERD, is remanded. 5. Service connection for a heart disability, to include TAA and AAA, is remanded. 6. Service connection for a low back disability, to include lumbar spine osteoarthritis, is remanded. 7. Service connection for residuals of a head injury, to include an eye disability, headaches, and/or fainting, is remanded. The claims file indicates that the Veteran’s service treatment records are missing and are presumed to have been destroyed by a fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973. The Veteran has stated that he began to suffer from stomach pain, back pain, and chest pain during his military service, and that these symptoms have continued to the present, and the Board finds him credible in this regard. See October 2014 Report of Military History; Hearing Transcript at 6, 20. The Veteran also reports that he was struck in the head and right eye with a rifle butt during his service while clearing enemy soldiers from the island of Saipan, and that he began to experience vision problems, headaches, and fainting. See Hearing Transcript at 20-21. Given the Veteran’s competent and credible report of his in-service symptomatology and the presence of current disabilities, the Board finds that VA examinations and medical nexus opinions are warranted and should be obtained on remand. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). Updated VA and private treatment records should also be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA treatment records. 2. With any necessary assistance from the Veteran, obtain any outstanding relevant private treatment records. 3. Then schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any gastrointestinal disorder found to be present, to include GERD. The claims file should be made available to and should be reviewed by the examiner. For each gastrointestinal disorder diagnosed, the examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder: (a) had its onset during active duty or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s service; or (b) in the case of a diagnosed peptic (gastric or duodenal) ulcer, initially manifested to a compensable degree as of December 1946. In addressing this question, the examiner should accept as true the Veteran’s competent and credible report that he began to experience stomach pain during service, that he was first diagnosed with acid reflux while working at Tinker Air Force Base from 1951-1976, and that his symptoms have continued from their onset through the present. A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. If a requested opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state and explain why this is the case. 4. Then schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any heart disorder found to be present, to include TAA and AAA. The claims file should be made available to and should be reviewed by the examiner. For each heart disorder diagnosed, the examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder: (a) had its onset during active duty or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s service; or (b) initially manifested to a compensable degree as of December 1946. In addressing this question, the examiner should accept as true the Veteran’s competent and credible report that he began to experience chest pain and fainting during service, and that his symptoms have continued from onset through the present. Please also note that outpatient records reflect the Veteran formerly smoked. A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. If a requested opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state and explain why this is the case. 5. Then schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any low back disorder found to be present, to include lumbar spine osteoarthritis. The claims file should be made available to and should be reviewed by the examiner. For each low back disorder diagnosed, the examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder: (a) had its onset during active duty or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s service; or (b) in the case of diagnosed arthritis, initially manifested to a compensable degree as of December 1946. In addressing this question, the examiner should accept as true the competent and credible reports by the Veteran and his daughter that the Veteran was not trained how to properly lift heavy objects by the Army, that he began to experience low back pain immediately after lifting a heavy object during active duty, that after his back injury the Veteran regularly sought treatment at sick bay due to his low back pain, and that the Veteran’s symptoms have continued from onset through the present, to include his need for a back brace and his progressive degeneration in posture. A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. If a requested opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state and explain why this is the case. 6. Then schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with the appropriate clinician or clinicians to determine the nature, extent, and etiology of any residuals of an in-service head injury found to be present, to include an eye disorder, headaches, or any disability manifested by fainting. The claims file should be made available to and should be reviewed by the examiner. For each such disorder diagnosed, the examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that such disorder had its onset during active duty or is otherwise related to the Veteran’s service. In addressing this question, the examiner should accept as true the Veteran’s competent and credible report that he was struck in the head and eye with a rifle butt during service, that he repeatedly would pass out while standing in formation, and that his symptoms (to include right eye vision problems) have continued from onset through the present. A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions expressed. If a requested opinion cannot be provided without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state and explain why this is the case. S. BUSH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD D.M. Badaczewski, Associate Counsel