Citation Nr: 21067802 Decision Date: 11/05/21 Archive Date: 11/05/21 DOCKET NO. 19-36 536 DATE: November 5, 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 from February 1963 to July 1964. The current appeal was previously before the Board in November 2020 at which time it was remanded for additional development, including outstanding treatment records and a new nexus opinion. Service Connection for Bilateral Hearing Loss Although the Board regrets the delay, an additional remand is necessary. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in June 2021 and the examiner offered a negative nexus opinion based, in part, on the Veteran's post-service exposure to hazardous noise. See June 2021 VA Examination, p. 3. The examiner referenced annual occupational hearing conservation testing, but such evidence is not part of the claims file and these records have not been requested by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). Because this evidence is relevant to the Veteran's claim, the Board finds that an additional remand is necessary so that the AOJ can attempt to secure these records. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A (2012). Service Connection for Tinnitus The Board previously determined that the Veteran's claim for tinnitus was inextricably intertwined with his claim for service connection for hearing loss. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991). As the hearing loss claim is being remanded, the Board finds that the tinnitus claim must also be remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Take appropriate steps to identify and obtain the Veteran's annual occupational hearing conservation test results from his post-service work. All efforts to obtain these records should be documented. If any records are not available, the Veteran should be notified and given an opportunity to obtain and submit them. 2. If additional records are retrieved, obtain a new nexus opinion on the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss. Any indicated evaluations, studies, and tests deemed necessary by the examiner should be accomplished. The entire claims file 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 should offer comments, an opinion, and a supporting rationale that addresses whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was incurred in, aggravated by, or is otherwise etiologically related to his active duty service. In providing this opinion, the examiner must consider the Veteran's in-service exposure to hazardous noise as a tank unit commander. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and 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 W.V. Walker, 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.