Citation Nr: 19106964
Decision Date: 01/29/19	Archive Date: 01/29/19

DOCKET NO. 16-01 498
DATE:	January 29, 2019

REMANDED

Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

Service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from May 1965 to May 1967.

These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from rating decisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

1. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss; however, a remand is necessary to obtain an addendum opinion addressing the etiology of the disability.

In September 2014 correspondence, the Veteran stated that in October 1967, he went to work for D.C.C. and that D.C.C. conducted audiometric testing.  He submitted the test results for review.  The date of the record is difficult to read; however, the Board agrees that the testing was completed in October 1967. 

After receiving the test results from D.C.C., the RO scheduled the Veteran for a VA examination.  In December 2014, a VA examiner addressed the D.C.C. test results; however, the examiner indicated that the test results were dated in October 1969 as opposed to October 1967.  Notably, the October 1967 test results show a worsening of hearing acuity within five months of the Veteran’s separation from service.  Accordingly, a remand is necessary to obtain an addendum opinion addressing the significance of the October 1967 test results, and whether the evidence supports a finding that the Veteran’s current bilateral hearing loss is related to service.

2. Service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

Finally, because a decision on the issue of service connection for bilateral hearing loss could significantly impact a decision on the issue of service connection for tinnitus, the issues are inextricably intertwined.  Therefore, the claim for service connection for tinnitus must be remanded.

The matters are REMANDED for the following actions:

1. Associate with the claims file updated VA treatment records, if any.

2. Ask the December 2014 VA examiner or another qualified clinician to review the Veteran’s electronic claims file and address the etiology of his bilateral hearing loss.  

The examiner should provide an opinion indicating whether the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to service, to include exposure to loud noise therein.  

Inform the examiner that prior to January 1, 1967, service departments are assumed to have used ASA units.  Service departments are assumed to have changed to ISO units after December 31, 1970.  For the period between January 1, 1967, and December 31, 1970, consider the data under both the ASA and ISO standards unless it is clearly indicated which units were used.  Thus, the audiometric examinations from September 1964, May 1965, and April 1967 should be converted from ASA to ISO standards.

The examiner should provide a rationale in support of all opinions and should comment on the significance, if any, of the threshold shifts observed, post-conversion, between entrance into and separation from service, and the significance of the testing completed in October 1967.

If the examiner finds that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is related to service, then the examiner should provide an opinion indicating whether his tinnitus is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) related to service or caused or aggravated by his bilateral hearing loss. 

The examiner should provide a rationale in support of all opinions.

(Continued on the next page)

 

3. Then, readjudicate the Veteran’s claims on appeal.  If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case.  Allow an appropriate period for response.

 

L. CHU

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	A. G. Alderman