Citation Nr: 18159880 Decision Date: 12/21/18 Archive Date: 12/20/18 DOCKET NO. 17-25 331 DATE: December 21, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for scars is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for headaches is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The appellant is a Korean War and Peacetime Era Veteran. He served in the United States Air Force from January 1951 to July 1955. The Veteran appeals his Rating Decision from April 2015 from Martinsburg, West Virginia. On his substantive appeal, the Veteran requested a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge in Washington, DC. Such a hearing was scheduled for August 2018. The Veteran did not attend his scheduled hearing, nor has he provided good cause as to why his requested hearing should be rescheduled. His request is considered withdrawn. 1. Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for scars is remanded. 4. Entitlement to service connection for headaches is remanded. The Veteran contends that each of his claimed disabilities is related to his active service, to include a claimed 1955 car accident. To this point, the RO has denied the Veteran’s claims on the basis that there is no evidence of treatment in service for his claimed conditions. The RO has also acknowledge, however, that the Veteran’s service treatment records are not available for review, as they were presumed destroyed in a 1973 fire at that National Personnel Records Center. In appeals where a Veteran's service treatment records are unavailable, there is a heightened obligation to assist the appellant in the development of the case, a heightened obligation to explain findings and conclusions, and a heightened duty to consider carefully the benefit of the doubt rule. See Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 369-70 (2005). In light of these heightened duties, the Board determines that additional development is needed prior to adjudicating these claims. First, the Veteran should be encouraged to submit any documents on his own behalf, whether service treatment records or otherwise, that document any ongoing treatment for or complaints of his claimed disabilities at any time since his separation from service. Next, the Veteran should be informed that he may submit alternate sources of information that support his contentions, including letters from fellow airmen, friends, or family who can corroborate his contentions. Finally, the Veteran should be scheduled for relevant VA examinations to determine whether his claimed disabilities are related to his active service. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Provide notification to the Veteran that he may submit any records in his possession (or provide releases to VA to obtain such records on his behalf) regarding treatment for his disabilities at any time since his separation in 1955. That notification must also advise the Veteran that he may submit alternative forms of evidence other than direct service treatment records, or other comparable medical evidence, to support his claims. 2. Once development is complete, schedule the Veteran for VA examinations before appropriate examiners to determine the current nature and possible relationship to service of his claimed disabilities. The examiner must review the entire claims file, including a copy of this remand. The examiner must consider the Veteran’s lay reports of observable symptomatology as well as all post-service medical records, including those generated with the Veteran’s earlier claim for pension in the 1970s. After a thorough review of the record is complete, the examiner must respond to the following: (a.) Does the Veteran currently suffer from bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus? If so, is it at least as likely as not that any such disabilities had their onset during or are otherwise related to his active service? (b.) Does the Veteran have any scars that had their onset in or are otherwise related to his active service, to include his claimed 1955 car accident? (c.) Does the Veteran currently suffer from headaches, and if so, are such headaches related to the Veteran’s active service, to include his claimed 1955 car accident? The examination report should specifically state that a review of the records was conducted. The examiner should provide a complete rationale for all opinions provided. The examiner is specifically instructed that the Veteran’s service treatment records are not available for review, and that no negative inferences may be drawn from their unavailability. If an opinion cannot be provided without resorting to mere speculation, the examiner should identify all medical and lay evidence considered in this conclusion, fully explain why this is the case, and identify what additional evidence, if any, would allow for a more definitive opinion. Evan Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. N. P. Jochem, Associate Counsel