Citation Nr: 1815552 Decision Date: 03/16/18 Archive Date: 03/23/18 DOCKET NO. 14-00 507 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Columbia, South Carolina THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD H. Yoo, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from November 1967 to June 1969, with service in the Republic of Vietnam. His awards and decorations include the Purple Heart Medal, among other awards. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Columbia, South Carolina. In August 2016, the Veteran testified during a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing has been obtained and associated with the record. The appeal is REMANDED to the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). VA will notify the Veteran if further action is required. REMAND Where VA provides the veteran with an examination in a service connection claim, the examination must be adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). A February 2015 VA examination was conducted. The examiner found that there was no hearing loss for VA purposes. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 (2017). At the August 2016 Board hearing, however, the Veteran reported that certain parts of his hearing loss had worsened. Thus, it may be that he now has hearing loss for VA purposes, or a current disability. Thus, the 2015 VA examination is no longer adequate and remand is required for a new examination. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Provide the Veteran with an appropriate examination to determine the etiology of his hearing loss. The entire claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. Any indicated tests and studies must be accomplished and all clinical findings must be reported in detail and correlated to a specific diagnosis. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. First, the examiner must determine if there is hearing loss for VA purposes. Second, if there is hearing loss for VA purposes, the examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the hearing loss had onset in, or is otherwise related to, active military service. The examiner must address the Veteran's military occupational specialty as a helicopter mechanic and the Veteran's lay statements regarding in-service noise exposure and onset of diminished hearing. 2. Notify the Veteran that it is his responsibility to report for any scheduled examination and to cooperate in the development of the claim, and that the consequences for failure to report for a VA examination without good cause may include denial of the claim. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158, 3.655 (2017). In the event that the Veteran does not report for any scheduled examination, documentation must be obtained which shows that notice scheduling the examination was sent to the last known address. It must also be indicated whether any notice that was sent was returned as undeliverable. 3. Ensure compliance with the directives of this remand. If the report is deficient in any manner, the AOJ must implement corrective procedures. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). 4. After completing the above action, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the paragraphs above, the claim must be readjudicated. If the claim remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters 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. §§ 5109B, 7112 (2012). _________________________________________________ K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (2012), 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) (2017).