Citation Nr: 21064913 Decision Date: 10/22/21 Archive Date: 10/22/21 DOCKET NO. 18-43 324 DATE: October 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1986 to September 1986. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2017 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In April 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual hearing before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. In May 2018, the Veteran submitted a statement regarding the onset of his hearing loss. He stated that he first noticed his hearing loss during basic training, particularly after being on the firing ranges. In June 2018, the Veteran underwent a VA hearing loss and tinnitus examination in which he was diagnosed with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. However, the examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was caused by or a result of an in-service event. The examiner reasoned that there was no significant change in hearing thresholds between the Veteran's entrance and separation examinations, in April 1985 and July 1992, respectively. The examiner also opined that the Veteran's right ear hearing loss existed prior to service and that the condition was not aggravated beyond its normal progression by his military service. The examiner used the same rationale for this opinion by relying on a lack of threshold shifts between the Veteran's entrance and separation examinations. The examiner did not address the Veteran's statements regarding onset of hearing loss during basic training, specifically at the firing range. The Board finds the June 2018 opinion to be inadequate for adjudication purposes, as the examiner relied solely on service treatment records in rendering a negative opinion without considering the Veteran's lay statements. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23 (2007) (holding that an examination was inadequate where the examiner did not comment on the Veteran's report of in-service injury but relied on the service medical records to provide a negative opinion). Accordingly, the claim must be remanded in order to obtain an adequate examination and opinion. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007) (when VA undertakes to provide a VA examination or obtain a VA opinion, it must ensure that the examination or opinion is adequate). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his bilateral hearing loss. Any indicated evaluations, studies, or tests deemed necessary by the examiner should be accomplished. The entire claims file, to include a complete copy of this REMAND, should be made available to the examiner designated to provide an opinion and the examination report should include a discussion of the Veteran's documented medical history and assertions. The examiner must address the following: (a.) Determine whether it is clear and unmistakable (i.e., manifest, obvious, or undebatable) that the Veteran's hearing loss of either ear existed prior to his entry into active duty service. (b.) If the Veteran did have hearing loss of either ear that existed prior to service, determine whether it is clear and unmistakable that such disability did not increase in severity during service beyond the natural progression of the condition. (c.) If the Veteran did not have hearing loss of either ear prior to service, determine whether it is least likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's current hearing loss was incurred in, aggravated by, or is otherwise etiologically related to his active duty service. In responding to the above, the examiner must address all relevant lay and medical evidence of record, including the Veteran's May 2018 statement regarding onset of hearing loss in service and the Veteran's April 2021 hearing testimony. (Continued on the next page) The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history and that such reports must be considered. If the examiner rejects the Veteran's reports, the examiner must provide a reason for doing so. A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Watkins, 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.