Citation Nr: 20073167 Decision Date: 11/13/20 Archive Date: 11/13/20 DOCKET NO. 16-44 884 DATE: November 13, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for the residuals of a trauma to the brain is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a disability manifested by headaches is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for vertigo, claimed as dizziness is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from June 1954 to July 1957. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from September 2014 and November 2016 rating decisions by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board remanded the appeal for further development in August 2019. This appeal has been advanced on the Board’s docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900. 38 U.S.C. § 7107 (a)(2). 1. Entitlement to service connection for the residuals of a trauma to the brain is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a disability manifested by headaches is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for vertigo, claimed as dizziness is remanded. Service treatment records show the Veteran was involved in an automobile accident in April 1954. June 1954 records state the Veteran struck his head against a rear-view mirror, after which he was semi-conscious for several minutes. He began to experience headaches about one week after the accident, and he was still having them in June 1954. He contends this head injury resulted in residuals of a trauma to the brain and a disability manifested by headaches. The private medical records show that the Veteran has been examined and treated for vertigo and dizziness from approximately 2010. He contends that these symptoms are caused by his service-connected hearing loss and/or tinnitus. In August 2019, the Board remanded these issues for VA examinations to determine the nature and etiology of the claimed disabilities. The Veteran was scheduled for VA examinations in January 2020 to evaluate the nature and etiology of his claimed TBI, headaches, and vertigo. The record shows that he did not report for the scheduled examinations. A March 2020 letter from the Veteran’s representative indicates that the Veteran did not receive notification that he had been scheduled for VA examinations for his claims. He requested that VA reschedule the VA examinations. The Board finds that the Veteran has presented good cause for his failure to report, however, he is cautioned that VA’s duty to assist is not a one-way street. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). It is the burden of a veteran to keep VA apprised of his whereabouts, to include notifying VA of any change of address or contact information. The appeal is remanded to afford the Veteran another opportunity to appear for the appropriate examinations. The Veteran is advised that failure to report for any scheduled VA examinations without good cause shown may have adverse effects on his appeal. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any residual disability resulting from a traumatic brain injury and any disability manifested by headaches. The examiner must opine whether one or both of these disabilities are at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the April 1954 automobile accident. See January 2014 STR – Medical, at 6. The examiner is to provide a comprehensive rationale for all opinions. Any negative opinion regarding the relationship of any current diagnosis to service cannot be based solely on the lack of evidence of a disability in the service treatment records. If the examiner is unable to provide an opinion without resorting to speculation, then state whether the inability is due to the limits of their knowledge, the limits of medical knowledge in general, or there is additional evidence that, if obtained, would permit the opinion to be provided. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any disability manifested by vertigo and/or dizziness. The examiner must opine whether this disability is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the April 1954 automobile accident. See January 2014 STR – Medical, at 6. If there is no pathology to support a diagnosis of a disability manifested by vertigo on the current VA examination, the Board requests the examiner to still provide the opinion for the diagnoses of vertigo that are found in the 2014 private medical records. If the examiner determines that any disability manifested by vertigo and/or dizziness is not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, they must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (1) proximately due to the Veteran’s service-connected hearing loss and/or tinnitus, or (2) aggravated beyond its natural progression by service-connected hearing loss and/or tinnitus. The examiner is to provide a comprehensive rationale for all opinions. Any negative opinion regarding the relationship of any current diagnosis to service cannot be based solely on the lack of evidence of a disability in the service treatment records. If the examiner is unable to provide an opinion without resorting to speculation, then state whether the inability is due to the limits of their knowledge, the limits of medical knowledge in general, or there is additional evidence that, if obtained, would permit the opinion to be provided. (Continued on the next page)   3. If the Veteran does not attend any of his scheduled examinations, document in the claims file all attempts to schedule the Veteran for the examination, to include a copy of the notice letter sent to his last known address and whether any notice was returned as undeliverable. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Lauritzen, Associate 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.