Citation Nr: 21015807 Decision Date: 03/18/21 Archive Date: 03/18/21 DOCKET NO. 17-63 419 DATE: March 18, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1962 to October 1965. He died in July 2019. See October 2019 Death Certificate. The Appellant is his surviving spouse and has been substituted for the Veteran. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2016 rating decision of a VA Regional Office (RO). The Board denied the Veteran’s claims for service connection in March 2019. Subsequently, the matter was appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court/CAVC). In a July 2020 decision, the Court vacated the Board’s March 2019 decision, granted the parties’ Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), and remanded the matter to the Board for action consistent with the ruling. In the parties’ July 2020 Joint Motion for Remand, the parties’ agreed that the November 2016 VA examination report was inadequate for adjudication purposes because the examiner’s opinion was based solely on the absence of evidence of in-serving hearing loss or tinnitus. Additionally, the opinion was inconsistent with and did not take into adequate account the Veteran’s lay statements. Accordingly, remand is necessary to obtain a VA medical opinion to assess the nature and etiology of his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Following a review of the entire claims file, a VA audiological professional is asked to opine as to the following matters regarding the claimed hearing loss and tinnitus: (a) Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that any diagnosed hearing loss disability had its onset during the Veteran’s service or within one year of service discharge, or is otherwise etiologically related to service, to include in-service noise exposure? In rendering this opinion, the examiner must specifically consider any lay statements given by the Veteran concerning his exposure to acoustic trauma while in service. (b) Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that any diagnosed tinnitus disability had its onset during the Veteran’s service or within one year of service discharge or is otherwise etiologically related to service, to include in-service noise exposure? In rendering this opinion, the examiner must specifically consider any lay statements given by the Veteran concerning his exposure to acoustic trauma while in service. (c) Is it at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that any diagnosed tinnitus disability was caused or aggravated (worsened beyond its natural progression) by the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss? A complete and thorough rationale must be provided for all opinions. The examiner is advised that a negative etiology opinion for either condition cannot be based solely on the lack of evidence of in-service hearing loss or tinnitus. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Hicks, 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.