Citation Nr: 21065719 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-22 211 DATE: October 27, 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 had active-duty service from July 1956 to June 1958. These matters come before the Board on appeal from an April 2017 rating decision and a January 2016 notification letter from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran was afforded a Board hearing in April 2019; a transcript has been associated with the record. The matters were previously denied by the Board in a May 2020 decision. The Veteran appealed those denials to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (CAVC or Court). A January 2021 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) vacated the denials and returned the matters to the Board for further action. The Court claimed that the Board erred when it relied on a December 2015 VA examination report that was inadequate for adjudication purposes since the examiner did not address why the Veteran's hearing loss was or was not related to his in-service noise exposure. The Court also found that the examiner did not address that the Veteran did not use hearing protection during service, but did post-service while he was employed. The Board remanded the issues in June 2021 to obtain an addendum opinion addressing whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus was incurred in or caused by service, specifically due to the noise exposure. The Board explained that the examiner must address the Veteran's contention that he did not wear hearing protection during service and that the examiner provide an explanation using medical principles where possible. The Board finds that there has not been substantial compliance with the June 2021 remand instructions and thus the issues must be remanded again. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. In the August 2021 VA addendum opinion, the examiner claimed that while it was possible that the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus were incurred in or were related to his military service, given the current evidence they are more likely related to his long history of civilian occupational noise exposure. The examiner furthered that the Veteran reported no use of hearing protection in military service and consistent use of hearing protection in his civilian occupation where he worked as an excavator for approximately forty-five years and as a factory worker for eight years. The examiner explained that even though the Veteran consistently used hearing protection during his civilian occupation, it did not change that the Veteran's history of noise exposure was overwhelmingly in his civilian occupation working years. The Board finds that the August 2021 VA medical opinion is inadequate for adjudication purposes. The examiner does not explain how even though the Veteran wore hearing protection consistently during his civilian occupations the noise exposure caused hearing loss and tinnitus. Additionally, while the examiner mentioned that the Veteran did not wearing hearing protection during military service, there was no explanation as to why this period did not cause the hearing loss or tinnitus, but instead made the conclusory statement that because the Veteran had more noise exposure after service that was more likely the reason why he has hearing loss and tinnitus. It also appeared that the VA examiner relied on the absence of evidence regarding any complaints or treatment for hearing loss and tinnitus during military service. As such, the matters must be remanded for an adequate addendum opinion. By this remand the Board makes no determination, expressed or implied, as to the credibility of any statements on file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Forward the record and a copy of this Remand to a new audiological examiner for completion of an addendum opinion. The examiner must review the entire record and consider the Veteran's lay statements. The examiner is asked to opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus was incurred in or caused by service, specifically to include the noise exposure during military service without any hearing protection. The examiner must provide a complete rationale for all conclusions reached. The examiner must address the Veteran's contention that he did not wear hearing protection in service which is why he has hearing loss and tinnitus. The examiner must also explain why or why not the Veteran's in service noise exposure caused the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus. The examiner cannot rely on the absence of evidence to make a conclusory statement. The examiner must explain everything with a rationale that follows medical principles. 2. After completion of the above, review the expanded record, and determine whether the issues may be granted. If any benefit sought remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative with a supplemental statement of the case. The appropriate period should be allowed for response before the appeal is returned to the Board. Thomas H. O'Shay Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Imam, 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.