Citation Nr: 20009971 Decision Date: 02/06/20 Archive Date: 02/05/20 DOCKET NO. 16-24 311 DATE: February 6, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for low testosterone has been withdrawn. Entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 20, 2013 for service connection for glaucoma has been withdrawn. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a low back condition, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a cervical spine condition, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for headaches, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for service-connected glaucoma is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a psychiatric disability, to include PTSD and depression, is remanded. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On October 21, 2019, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received written notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of service connection for low testosterone was requested. 2. On October 21, 2019, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received written notification from the Veteran, through his authorized representative, that a withdrawal of the issue of an effective date earlier than June 20, 2013 for service connection for glaucoma was requested. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of service connection for low testosterone by the appellant (or his or her authorized representative) have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. 2. The criteria for withdrawal of an effective date earlier than June 20, 2013 for service connection for glaucoma by the appellant (or his or her authorized representative) have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served active duty in the United States Navy from September 1989 to July 1996. In November 2019, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Video Conference hearing. A copy of the transcript has been associated with the claims file. Withdrawal 1. Service connection for low testosterone 2. An effective date earlier than June 20, 2013 for service connection for glaucoma The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. In the present case, the Veteran, through his authorized representative, has withdrawn the issues of service connection for low testosterone and entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 20, 2013 for service connection for glaucoma, and hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review these issues, and they are dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. The Veteran contends that his claimed bilateral hearing loss is due to his period of service. In a December 2014 VA audio examination, the audiologist reported that the audiometric results did not meet the criteria for a hearing loss disability for VA purposes. The Board notes that the Veteran has reported in-service noise exposure. At a November 2019 Board hearing, the Veteran stated that his hearing had worsened since his last VA examination. A remand is necessary to determine whether the Veteran’s hearing is such that it meets the requirements for a hearing loss disability for VA purposes. 2. Service connection for a low back condition, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. The Veteran contends that his low back condition is due to his period of service. The Veteran’s private medical records indicate treatment for a low back condition. The Veteran, through his representative, asserts that his low back disability is due to Gulf War syndrome. The Board notes that the Veteran’s military personnel records indicate qualifying service for the purpose of determining whether the Veteran has an illness related to service in the Southwest Asia theater during the Persian Gulf War. The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination for the claimed disability. Therefore, a remand is necessary. 3. Service connection for a cervical spine condition, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. The Veteran contends that his cervical spine condition is due to his period of service. The Veteran’s private medical records indicate treatment for a cervical spine condition, to include a February 2015 surgery. In a May 1993 service treatment record, the Veteran reported neck strain among several symptoms. The Veteran, through his representative, has asserted in the alternative, that his cervical spine disability is due to Gulf War syndrome. The Board notes that the Veteran’s military personnel records indicate qualifying service for the purpose of determining whether the Veteran has an illness related to service in the Southwest Asia theater during the Persian Gulf War. The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination for the claimed disability. Therefore, a remand is necessary. 4. Service connection for headache, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome, is remanded. The Veteran contends that his migraine condition is due to his period of service. The Veteran’s June 2018 private medical records indicate current treatment for a headache condition. In June 1990, July 1993, and October 1993 service treatment records, the Veteran reported complaint of headache or migraine. Moreover, the Veteran, through his representative, has asserted in the alternative, that his headache condition is due to Gulf War syndrome. The Board notes that the Veteran’s military personnel records indicate qualifying service for the purpose of determining whether the Veteran has an illness related to service in the Southwest Asia theater during the Persian Gulf War. The Veteran has not been afforded a VA examination for the claimed disability. Therefore, a remand is necessary. 5. An initial compensable rating for service-connected glaucoma is remanded. The Veteran contends that his glaucoma is such that a compensable rating is warranted. The Veteran’s last VA examination for his disability was in June 2016. When available evidence is too old for an adequate evaluation of the Veteran’s current condition, VA’s duty to assist includes providing a new examination. Weggenmann v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 281 (1993). The Veteran has asserted that since the last examination, he requires continuous medication for his glaucoma. The Board finds that the June 2016 examination is remote, and there is evidence of worsening of the Veteran’s service-connected glaucoma. Therefore, a remand is necessary. 6. Service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include depression, is remanded. The Veteran contends that he has an acquired psychiatric disorder, to include PTSD and depression, due to his period of service. In September 2014, the Veteran was afforded VA examination. The examiner found that the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a diagnosis of PTSD. The examiner explained that the Veteran’s symptoms did not arise to a PTSD diagnosis under DSM 5. The examiner did find that the Veteran has a diagnosis of persistent depressive disorder. Though the Veteran has provided lay and buddy statements related to his claimed stressors, the service treatment records do not show complaint of or treatment for a psychiatric disorder. The etiology of the diagnosis of persistent depressive disorder is not clear; however, the September 2014 examiner indicated that the diagnosis could be exacerbated by the Veteran’s back pain, which is currently on appeal for service connection. As the outcome of the Veteran’s claim for service connection for low back pain would affect the claim of service connection for the Veteran’s depressive disorder, these matters are inextricably intertwined. Thus, the issue is remanded pending adjudication of the claim for service connection for a low back condition. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (noting that two or more issues are inextricably intertwined if one claim could have significant impact on the other). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran with an appropriate examiner(s) to determine the nature and etiology of his bilateral hearing loss, low back condition, cervical spine condition and headache condition, and the current severity of his service-connected glaucoma. After examination and review of the record, the examiner(s) is asked to address the following: a. Determine if the Veteran’s current hearing loss is such that it meets the criteria for hearing loss disability for VA purposes. If the criteria are met, the examiner is asked to determine whether the Veteran’s hearing loss is due to the Veteran’s period of service. b. Determine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s current low back condition is due to his period of service, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome. c. Determine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s current cervical spine condition is due to his period of service, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome. In making this determination, the examiner is asked to discuss the May 1993 service treatment record. d. Determine whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s current headache condition is due to his period of service, to include as due to Gulf War syndrome. In making this determination, the examiner is asked to discuss the June 1990, July 1993, and October 1993 service treatment records. e. Determine the current level of severity of the Veteran’s glaucoma. All necessary diagnostic testing and evaluation should be performed, and all findings set forth in detail, utilizing the most up-to-date Disability Benefits Questionnaire. JENNIFER HWA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Ford 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.