Citation Nr: 19192580 Decision Date: 12/10/19 Archive Date: 12/10/19 DOCKET NO. 17-47 418 DATE: December 10, 2019 ORDER New and material evidence having been received, the claim of service connection for a right foot disorder is reopened; to this limited extent, the appeal is granted. New and material evidence having been received, the claim of service connection for a left foot disorder is reopened; to this limited extent, the appeal is granted. New and material evidence having been received, the claim of service connection for hearing loss is reopened; to this limited extent, the appeal is granted. REMANDED Service connection for a right foot disorder is remanded. Service connection for a left foot disorder is remanded. Service connection for hearing loss is remanded.   DECISION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1977 to August 1981. The case is on appeal from June 2016 and December 2018 rating decisions. In December 2019, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing. 1. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a previously denied claim of service connection for a right foot disorder. 2. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a previously denied claim of service connection for a left foot disorder. By an August 2013 rating decision, the claims of service connection for bilateral feet disorders were denied. The Veteran was notified of the decision by letter in September 2013, which was mailed to the then current mailing address of record. Thereafter, nothing further regarding the claims was received until the present claim to reopen in November 2015. No new evidence or notice of disagreement (NOD) was received by VA within one year of the issuance of the August 2013 rating decision. As the Veteran did not appeal the decision, that rating decision is final. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.302, 20.1103. The Board finds that new and material evidence has been received so that the previously denied claims of service connection for bilateral feet disorders are reopened. See 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). See the December 2019 Board hearing transcript (asserting the current feet disorders are related to service). The reopened claims are further addressed below. 3. Whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a previously denied claim of service connection for hearing loss. With regard to the Veteran’s claim for service connection for hearing loss, this claim was initially denied by the RO in the August 2013 rating decision. The Veteran was notified of the decision by letter in September 2013, which was mailed to the then current mailing address of record. The Veteran did not submit an NOD or new and material evidence within one year of the decision. Thereafter, the Veteran submitted a claim to reopen in November 2015. The claim was again denied in the June 2016 rating decision. The Veteran was notified of the decision by letter later that month, which was mailed to the then current mailing address of record. Thereafter, nothing further regarding the hearing loss claim was received until the present claim to reopen in August 2018. No new evidence or NOD received by VA within one year of the issuance of the June 2016 rating decision. While an April 2017 NOD was received, the Veteran challenged only the bilateral feet claims addressed above. As the Veteran did not appeal the decision, the June 2016 rating decision is final for the hearing loss claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.302, 20.1103. The Board finds that new and material evidence has been submitted so that the previously denied claim of service connection for hearing loss is reopened. See 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). See the September 2018 VA examination and December 2019 Board hearing transcript. The reopened claim is further addressed below. REASONS FOR REMAND Updated VA treatment records since December 2018 should be requested. Additionally, at the Board hearing, the Veteran indicated he is receiving benefits through the Social Security Administration (SSA). As those SSA records are potentially relevant to the Veteran’s claims, they should be requested. 1. Service connection for a right foot disorder. 2. Service connection for a left foot disorder. The Veteran contends that his bilateral feet disorders are related to service. At the December 2019 Board hearing, he testified that his current feet disorders were caused by his feet being frozen during service, including while on aircraft duty during a cold storm. Additionally, the service treatment records (STRs) show the Veteran had several reports of problems related to his feet during service. The STRs include a December 1979 record which showed a right foot sprain, as well as tenderness and poor range of motion. A February 1980 record noted the Veteran received treatment related to a callus on his left foot, diagnosed as a plantar wart. A later February 1980 service record showed the Veteran reported a sprained right foot with poor range of motion. The Board finds the Veteran should be provided with a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his right and left foot disorders. Based on his in-service treatment, along with his recent hearing testimony in support, the low threshold requirement has been met for a VA examination to determine the etiology of his feet disorders. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). 3. Service connection for hearing loss. The Veteran contends that his current bilateral hearing loss is related to service, to include hazardous noise he was exposed to while working on the flight line aboard aircraft carriers. The Veteran’s service treatment records do not contain evidence of hearing loss. However, the records confirm that he served aboard the Naval aircraft carriers USS Enterprise and USS Shenandoah. The Veteran was afforded a September 2018 VA examination which showed current bilateral hearing loss. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The examiner determined the Veteran’s hearing loss is not related to service. He stated the Veteran’s service records do not support the hearing loss claim, as his enlistment and separation examinations both showed normal hearing bilaterally. Thereafter, during the December 2019 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his current hearing loss had its onset during service. He stated he was exposed to consistent hazardous noise, as he worked on the flight line with no hearing protection, and that he slept below the flight deck. In light of this additional evidence, the Board finds an additional VA examination is warranted to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s hearing loss. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain VA treatment records from December 2018. 2. Request all SSA records and associate them with the claims file. 3. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination by a podiatrist, if possible, to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed bilateral feet disorders. The examiner should identify any right and left feet disabilities. The examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the disorders had their onset during, or are otherwise related to, service, to include his in-service feet treatment. Any opinion provided should address the Veteran’s lay statements and should include a complete rationale. 4. Schedule the Veteran for a VA audiological examination with an ENT specialist to determine the nature and etiology of his hearing loss. The examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s hearing loss had its onset during, or is otherwise related to, service, to include his exposure to hazardous noise on the flight line while aboard aircraft carriers. Any opinion provided should address the Veteran’s lay statements and should include a complete rationale. RYAN T. KESSEL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Isaacs, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.