Citation Nr: 20037538 Decision Date: 06/02/20 Archive Date: 06/02/20 DOCKET NO. 19-34 504 DATE: June 2, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for vertigo, to include as secondary to service-connected tinnitus is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service in the United States Marine Corps (USMC) from August 1971 to August 1974. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2019 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Service Connection – Vertigo The Board finds that additional development is required before the claim on appeal is decided. The Veteran has asserted that his vertigo was caused or aggravated by his service-connected tinnitus. A review of the record shows that the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in November 2018. At that time, the examiner diagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. In January 2019, a VA medical opinion was obtained. At that time, the examiner opined that the Veteran’s BPPV was less likely as not due to his tinnitus. However, the examiner did not provide an opinion as to whether the Veteran’s tinnitus aggravated his vertigo. Therefore, the January 2019 VA medical opinion is incomplete and not sufficient for adjudication purposes at this time. Therefore, an addendum medical opinion must be obtained before a decision is made in this appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the Veteran’s claims file to the VA Medical Center for an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of his benign paroxysmal positional vertigo. The examiner must review the claims file and note that review in the report. Based on a review of the record, the examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or better probability) that the Veteran’s diagnosed benign paroxysmal positional vertigo is aggravated by a service-connected disability, to specifically include tinnitus. The rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. Another VA examination of the Veteran should only be conducted if deemed necessary by the examiner providing the requested medical opinion. 2. Confirm that the VA medical opinion comports with this remand and undertake any other development determined to be warranted. (Continued on the next page)   3. Then, readjudicate the appeal. If the decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board I. Umez-Eronini, 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.