Citation Nr: 21003124 Decision Date: 01/19/21 Archive Date: 01/19/21 DOCKET NO. 15-38 636 DATE: January 19, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from November 1967 to September 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal of a rating decision issued by the Milwaukee, Wisconsin Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in September 2013. The Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in February 2019.   1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Although the Board regrets the additional delay, remand is required for an adequate VA opinion. Where VA provides the veteran with an examination in a service connection claim, the examination must be adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). The Board is obligated by law to ensure that the RO complies with its directives. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). RO compliance with remand directives is not optional or discretionary and the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure remand compliance. Stegall, 11 Vet. App. at 271. The Veteran had been provided with a VA examination in August 2013. The VA audiologist diagnosed bilateral hearing loss and provided a negative nexus opinion, reasoning that audiometric testing was normal at discharge and there were no significant changes in hearing thresholds during active service. The Board determined in a November 2019 decision, however, that this examination was inadequate because the examiner failed to address the Veteran’s competent lay statements of record that he noticed hearing difficulties beginning in the 1970s. The Veteran was provided with another VA examination in October 2020 to evaluate his hearing. The examiner found that the Veteran’s diagnosed bilateral hearing loss was less likely than not related to his active duty service as the Veteran’s hearing thresholds were normal at entrance and separation. The examiner also noted that the Veteran reported over 20 years working in occupational noise post service. The examiner did not address the Veteran’s lay statements regarding his loss in hearing beginning in the 1970s, prior to workplace noise exposure, as instructed by the previous Board remand. As such, remand is required for an adequate VA opinion that addresses the Veteran’s lay statements. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum opinion regarding the etiology of the bilateral hearing loss from a VA examiner. The entire claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner. If an examination is deemed necessary, it shall be provided. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. The examiner must provide an opinion regarding whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the bilateral hearing loss had onset in, or is otherwise related to, active military service. The examiner must specifically address the Veteran’s assertions of noticing difficulty hearing as early as the 1970s, the prior VA examinations, and the relevant service treatment records. K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Ashley Ki 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.