Citation Nr: 21063493
Decision Date: 10/14/21	Archive Date: 10/14/21

DOCKET NO. 17-45 666
DATE: October 14, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty with the Marine Corps from March 1961 to March 1964.

In January 2019, the Board remanded the issue on appeal for further development, and the case has since been returned to the Board.  The Board finds that the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) has substantially complied with the remand directives.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).

Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

Regarding both issues on appeal, the Board finds that the sole VA examination of record is inadequate. Indeed, when providing the June 2015 opinion on both bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, the examiner noted that the Veteran's claims file had not been reviewed in conjunction with the examination. Accordingly, an addendum opinion is required that takes account of the Veteran's full claims file and associated evidence. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007) (holding that once VA undertakes an examination, it must provide an adequate one).

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran's bilateral ear hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's military service. In providing an opinion, the examiner MUST review the Veteran's entire claims file.

2.  Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran's tinnitus is at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's military service. In providing an opinion, the examiner MUST review the Veteran's entire claims file.

 

 

L. M. BARNARD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. A. Elliott II, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.