Citation Nr: 21005444
Decision Date: 02/01/21	Archive Date: 02/01/21

DOCKET NO. 16-11 896
DATE: February 1, 2021

REMANDED

Service connection for right ear hearing loss.

Service connection for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS).

REASONS FOR REMAND

In October 2018, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  In June 2019, the Board deny service connection for right ear hearing loss and CTS. The Veteran appealed to the Veterans Claims Court. 

In August 2020, the Court Clerk granted a joint motion for partial remand (JMPR) and returned the case to the Board for actions consistent with the JMPR. The case is now before the Board for further appellate action.

As to the right ear hearing loss, in accordance with the August 2020 JMPR, all relevant private treatment records should be obtained. Specifically, any private audiograms that tend to suggest right ear hearing loss for VA purposes. 

As to CTS, the Court Clerk found that the July 2014 VA peripheral nerves examination was inadequate and remand is necessary to obtain a medical opinion. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following actions:

1. Identify and obtain any outstanding, pertinent, VA and private treatment records, to include any and all private audiological evaluations indicated by the Veteran. 

This is to specifically include any audiological assessment conducted at Sam’s Club as noted by the Veteran at the October 2018 Board hearing. 

A negative response should be provided if records do not exist or are not available. 

2. Direct the claims file to a clinician to assess the etiology of bilateral CTS.

After a review of the record, the clinician is asked to provide an opinion as to the following:

•	whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that bilateral CTS is etiologically related to service.

In forming the opinion, the clinician is asked to specifically consider and address the Veteran’s statements at the July 2014 VA examination that he was diagnosed with CTS in service and experienced tingling since that time.

A thorough rationale is required for all opinions rendered. 

 

3. If the clinician determines that an examination is necessary in order to provide the requested opinion, then one should be scheduled.

 

 

L. HOWELL

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Yacoub, 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.