Citation Nr: 21064618 Decision Date: 10/21/21 Archive Date: 10/21/21 DOCKET NO. 16-08 194 DATE: October 21, 2021 ORDER Service connection for tinnitus is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's tinnitus had its onset in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from February 1968 to August 1968. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board acknowledges that the Veteran's attorney submitted a VA Form 20-0995, Decision Review Request: Supplemental Claim, in October 2020, wishing to opt into the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). In the form, the Veteran filed a supplemental claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. In correspondence dated in October 2020, the AOJ denied the supplemental claim request, stating that the appeal for those issues was already pending/processing. In May 2021, the Board received a motion to partially vacate its April 2021 decision as it applies to the above matters. In a September 2021 decision, the Board denied the Veteran's motion. As such, the case will proceed in the currently assigned Legacy docket. 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran contends that his tinnitus began while on active duty. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current disability that began during active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Initially, the Board notes that VA conceded the Veteran's exposure to noise in the September 2019 VA examination report. In an October 2020 affidavit, the Veteran attested that while on active duty he was at a firing range 2 to 3 times per week but was never provided any hearing protection. He then stated that after the first few sessions he began noticing ringing in his ears that initially lasted for a few hours but increased in duration the more he would attend the firing range. He further stated that after a few years had passed after separation he went to an ENT specialist in Denver who helped him manage his tinnitus, but further stated that it has never gone away. The Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report his noise exposure and the onset of his tinnitus, and the Board finds his statements regarding tinnitus to be credible. See, Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence to at least be in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's current tinnitus arose in service. As such, service connection for tinnitus is warranted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b); Fountain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 258 (2015). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. In September 2018 the Board remanded this matter for an examination with a directive to convert the results of the 1967, 1968, and 1970 service audiograms from ASA to ISO-ANSI. Repeated VA examiners have failed to do this, stating it is unnecessary. In April 2021 the Board remanded and specifically directed the RO to consider the numerous medical articles regarding hearing loss submitted by the Veteran. Neither the subsequent June 2021 VA examination report nor the June 2021 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) discussed these medical articles. A Board remand confers upon an appellant the right to compliance with that order. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271; D'Aries v. Peak, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008) (holding that there must be substantial compliance with the terms of a Court or Board remand). When VA undertakes to provide a Veteran with an examination, that examination must be adequate for VA purposes. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an addendum to the June 2021 VA examination. The examiner must convert the 1967, 1968, and 1970 service audiograms from ASA to ISO-ANSI and review the numerous medical articles regarding hearing loss submitted by the Veteran before rendering an opinion regarding whether it is as likely as not the Veteran's hearing loss was incurred in or otherwise caused by conceded in-service noise exposure. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Keeley, Brian 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.