Citation Nr: 21010763 Decision Date: 02/25/21 Archive Date: 02/25/21 DOCKET NO. 16-04 013 DATE: February 25, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for left knee disability is remanded. Service connection for right knee disability is remanded. Service connection for bilateral pes planus is remanded. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from June 1973 to April 1976. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a May 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2019, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. In August 2019, the Board granted service connection for deviated septum, and denied service connection for right knee disability, left knee disability, pes planus, and bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran appealed that Board decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In August 2020, the Court issued an order granting the parties’ joint motion for partial remand (JMPR) concerning the Veteran’s claims for service connection for right knee disability, left knee disability, pes planus, and bilateral hearing loss. The matters have been returned to the Board for review. Left knee disability, Right knee disability and Bilateral pes planus In the August 2020 JMPR, the parties determined that the Board failed in its duty to assist the Veteran by not requesting identified private treatment records. In this respect, during the February 2019 hearing, the Veteran testified that he sought private medical treatment from American Family Care for his feet and from “Thomas Jefferson” for his right and left knee disabilities. Because VA was on notice of relevant private treatment records, remand is required to make efforts to obtain these records. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. The August 2020 JMPR determined that VA failed in its duty to assist the Veteran by not obtaining an adequate medical opinion concerning the etiology of the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability. The parties found that the December 2015 VA examiner’s opinion was inadequate. The December 2015 VA examiner’s rationale explained that the Veteran had normal hearing at both induction and separation from service, but the examiner failed to address whether the Veteran’s current bilateral hearing loss was related to his noise exposure in service. See Stefl v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 120, 123 (2007). Therefore, remand is required to obtain a new VA medical opinion concerning the etiology of the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and request properly executed releases for any private care providers who have treated him for any claimed conditions. Releases for American Family Care and “Thomas Jefferson” must be specifically requested. Upon receipt of such, VA must take appropriate action to contact the identified providers and request complete treatment records. The Veteran should be informed that in the alternative he may obtain and submit the records himself. 2. Return the Veteran’s claims file to the December 2015 VA examiner; or, if unavailable, another suitably qualified VA examiner to provide an opinion concerning the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability. The examiner must note that the claims file was reviewed. Thereafter, the examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or higher) that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability is caused by active service. In doing so, the examiner must address the Veteran’s reported in-service noise exposure. The examiner may not base the opinion solely on the absence of hearing loss during active service. A full and complete rationale must be provided for any opinion reached. 3. Thereafter, readjudicate the matters on appeal. If any issue remains denied, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case and return the matter(s) to the Board, if in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Seay, 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.