Citation Nr: 21015528 Decision Date: 03/17/21 Archive Date: 03/17/21 DOCKET NO. 13-26 927 DATE: March 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for Meniere’s disease is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active service from April 1965 to June 1968 with an additional period of non-qualifying service from June 1968 to January 1972. Unfortunately, the Veteran passed away in October 2015 while this claim was pending. The appellant is his surviving spouse and the RO has accepted her request to be substituted as the deceased Veteran for the purpose of processing this claim to completion. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a May 2013 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Denver, Colorado. The appellant presented testimony on this issue at a September 2019 video conference hearing held at her local RO before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). Addressing the relevant procedural history, this claim was previously before the Board in December of 2019 at which time the Board denied it. The appellant appealed the Board’s denial to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (the Court). In August of 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) signed by both parties and remanded the claim to the Board for action consistent with the terms of the JMPR. In lieu of the JMPR, the Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the appellant’s service connection for Meniere’s disease claim until further development has been undertaken. Specifically, it was stipulated in the JMPR that, “[a]s the March 2013 and July 2014 VA examinations were inadequate, the parties agree that remand is warranted for the Board to obtain a new examination”. Therefore, a new opinion should be authored on remand by a VA examiner that adequately considers the evidence of record, including the medical treatise evidence submitted by the appellant and her lay assertions. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate medical professional. The medical professional must be provided with and review the entire claims file, to include a copy of this remand, and it should be confirmed that this was reviewed. Following a review of the evidence of record, to include the Veteran’s lay statements, the clinician is requested to provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or higher) that the Veteran’s Meniere’s disease began in or was etiologically related to his active duty service, to include conceded noise exposure during service associated with his occupational specialty of aircraft mechanic. An explanation must be provided for all conclusions reached. As part of his or her rationale, the medical professional is specifically asked to address, and reconcile to the extent possible, the medical treatise evidence submitted by the appellant AND the assertions made by the appellant at the September 2019 Board hearing that the Veteran began experiencing symptomology such as vertigo during service which constituted early manifestations of the Veteran’s then-undiagnosed Meniere’s disease. The medical professional must also consider and reconcile any conflicting medical evidence or opinions of record. 2. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case to the appellant and her representative. Then return the appeal to the Board for further appellate review. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Smith, 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.