Citation Nr: 21066982 Decision Date: 11/03/21 Archive Date: 11/03/21 DOCKET NO. 17-61 025 DATE: November 3, 2021 REMANDED The claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service in the U.S. Army from August 1970 to April 1972, including service in the Vietnam. A March 2020 Board decision granted service connection for tinnitus, but denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a March 2021 Memorandum Decision, the Court vacated the part of the March 2020 Board decision denying service connection for hearing loss. The Court found that the Board did not provide adequate reasons and basis for its decision, in that the Board relied on an inadequate VA medical opinion dated June 2015 which based, in part, on (1) a separation audiogram which showed zero decibels for all frequencies from 500 Hz to 6000 Hz for both ears and was contested by the Veteran that no actual audiometric testing had actually been conducted at his separation examination (see 11/20/2017 document entitled "Correspondence"), and (2) the assumption that the Veteran first reported difficulty hearing just a few years prior to 2012, which was contradicted by VA treatment records in 2014 showing that he first noticed hearing loss at least 20 years earlier (see 8/18/2014 Otolaryngology Consult contained in 5/13/2015 document entitled "CAPRI" ). The Court instructed the Board to obtain a new VA examination that addresses the Veteran's description of separation examination and 2014 report of at least 20 years of hearing loss (See 3/29/2021 document entitled CAVC decision PP 21-26.) In an Appellate Brief dated October 2021, the Veteran's representative requested the Board to clarify whether the audiometric results of the separation examination should be disregarded. Given that the separation audiogram showed zero decibels for all frequencies from 500 Hz to 6000 Hz for both ears, indicating lack of thoroughness of the testing, in conjunction with the Veteran's report that no actual audiometric testing had actually been conducted at his separation examination, the Board finds that the Veteran's report is plausible and credible and the audiometric results of the separation examination should be disregarded as it does not appear to represent the result of actual audiometric testing at time of the Veteran's separation from service. Therefore, matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for a VA audiological examination. The examiner should answer the following question: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's hearing loss in either ear either began during or was otherwise caused by his military service? Why or why not? In providing the requested opinion, the examiner should consider the following: a) Please review the Court's Memorandum Decision dated March 2021 (see 3/29/2021 document entitled CAVC decision PP 21-26) to understand why the June 2015 VA medical opinion was found to be inadequate. b) Disregard the audiometric testing results contained in the separation physical as the Board has found that it does not constitute results of audiometric testing having been conducted at the time of the separation. That is, the audiometric testing recorded in the separation physical is to be disregarded. c) Discuss the Veteran's following reports/statements regarding the onset of his hearing loss. Absent other rebutting evidence, his reports/statements should be deemed as credible. (1) The Veteran's August 2014 report that he first noticed hearing loss at least 20 years earlier. (See 8/18/2014 Otolaryngology Consult contained in 5/13/2015 document entitled "CAPRI"). (2) The Veteran's email statement dated April 2020 explaining his August 2014 report of hearing loss onset, that when he was asked by the VA physician how long he had the muffled hearing, he replied that he had it since he got out of Vietnam for more than 20 years, which he should have said for 42 years. (See 4/30/2020 document entitled "Email Correspondence".) MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Wang, 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.