Citation Nr: 21005596 Decision Date: 02/02/21 Archive Date: 02/02/21 DOCKET NO. 20-09 474 DATE: February 2, 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 January 1961 to January 1977 and from January 1981 to October 1981. This matter is on appeal from January 2018 rating decision. On his March 2020 VA Form 9 the Veteran requested a video conference hearing, but later withdrew his hearing request in October 2020 correspondence. The Board observes that, in an October 8, 2020 letter, the Veteran’s attorney requested an extension of time of 90 days to allow for the submission of additional evidence and argument. The Board granted this motion. The requested extension period has run, and the Veteran’s attorney did in fact submit additional argument and reference to additional evidence, waiving review of such by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) in the first instance. As such, the Board will proceed with adjudication. The Veteran claims his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is the result of acoustic trauma during service. Service treatment records are negative for any documentation of complaint, relevant findings, treatment for, or diagnosis of hearing loss and tinnitus. The December 2017 VA examination shows that the Veteran had a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s hearing loss and tinnitus were less likely than not a result of military noise exposure. The examiner acknowledged that the Veteran was exposed to a lot of noise while in the military but reasoned that his entrance and separation examinations were within normal limits and had no mention of tinnitus. In October 2020 correspondence, the Veteran’s representative stated that the Veteran was exposed to consistent, high noise levels every day for years, for eight hours a day, and five days a week with jet engines constantly whining while working as a Jet Engine Technician in service. Since leaving service, the Veteran did not experience loud noise exposure. The representative referred to an article from UC Health suggesting that just as sun exposure accumulated over time and could lead to skin cancer, noise exposure could lead to hearing loss years or decades later. Consistent exposure to loud noise over time was cumulative and could ultimately cause serious damage to an individual’s hearing as well as tinnitus. The representative added that the article appeared to suggest that the Veteran’s military noise exposure likely caused his hearing loss and tinnitus, even though the conditions did not manifest until years later. Therefore, on remand, the AOJ should obtain an addendum VA medical opinion to address the representative’s contentions and referenced article that support the Veteran’s claim. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and/or tinnitus are at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to service, including conceded noise exposure therein. In providing a response, the examiner should discuss the representative’s October 2020 correspondence and referenced article from UC Health. The examiner must provide a supporting rationale for each opinion. If normal in-service hearing test results have a bearing on the answer to the question above, the examiner must explain why such results are clinically significant, and how, from a medical perspective, they help inform the ultimate conclusion reached. 2. Then, readjudicate the issues on appeal. V. Chiappetta Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board L. Crohe, 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.