Citation Nr: 21024767 Decision Date: 04/26/21 Archive Date: 04/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-48 341 DATE: April 26, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran was a member of the Louisiana Army National Guard from November 1979 to October 1984, and the Michigan Army National Guard from October 1984 to August 1985. He was discharged under honorable conditions. During his membership in the National Guard, he had a period of inactive duty training (INACDUTRA) from March 1980 to June 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2014 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which, in pertinent part, denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran’s timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) was received by VA in September 2014. In August 2017, the RO issued a Statement of the Case (SOC). In September 2017, the Veteran perfected a timely appeal via his submission of a VA Form 9. In February 2021, the Veteran testified at a virtual Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the hearing transcript is a part of the record. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran contends his current bilateral hearing loss is causally related to noise exposure during his period of INACDUTRA from March 1980 to June 1980. He claims that in the course of performing his duties as an Armor Crewman, he sustained acoustic trauma injury from tank engines and guns, as well as weapons fire and hand grenades. See February 2021 Transcript of Hearing pages 2-3; September 2014 NOD. The Board notes that service connection is in effect for tinnitus, as the result of conceded acoustic trauma during the Veteran’s period of INACDUTRA from March 1980 to June 1980. See August 2017 rating decision; Hill v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 243, 252 (2016) (“[O]nce a claimant has achieved veteran status for a single disability incurred or aggravated during a period of ACDUTRA, that status applies to all disabilities claimed to have been incurred or aggravated during that period of ACDUTRA.”). Service treatment records corresponding to the Veteran’s membership in the Army National Guard are entirely silent for any indication of a hearing loss disability, including during his period of INACDUTRA from March 1980 to June 1980. In May 1984, the Veteran underwent a retention examination in connection with his membership in the Army National Guard. At that time, audiometric testing showed puretone thresholds, in decibels, as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 15 20 5 -- 10 LEFT 20 25 10 -- 15 In connection with his claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in September 2013. Audiometric testing showed pure tone thresholds, in decibels, as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 15 15 20 30 30 LEFT 25 25 25 35 35 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 96 percent in the right ear and of 96 percent in the left ear. After examining the Veteran and reviewing the record, the audiologist diagnosed the Veteran as having bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The audiologist concluded that the Veteran’s hearing loss is as least as likely as not caused by or a result of an event in military service. The audiologist explained that the Veteran had been an armor crewman and had reported noise exposure from tanks and bombs. Additionally, she noted that the Veteran had been awarded a pistol caliber .45 qualification badge. The audiologist indicated that these levels of noise exposure can cause inner hair cell damage, resulting in hearing loss and tinnitus. During the February 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran described the circumstances of his noise exposure during his period of INACDUTRA. He testified that he had been provided hearing protection during service. After his discharge, the Veteran testified that he worked in an oil field and then as a machine operator at a bakery. He indicated that he had been provided hearing protection while working in the bakery but not while working in the oil field. The Veteran recalled that in 1998, he underwent a hearing test in connection with his employment at the bakery and was advised that the hearing in his left ear was “bad.” The Veteran also testified that his hearing acuity had worsened since his September 2013 VA examination. After reviewing the record on appeal, the Board finds that additional evidentiary development is necessary. First, at the February 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran identified potentially relevant medical evidence in the form of a hearing test conducted in 1998 which reportedly identified a left ear hearing loss. On remand, the RO should undertake the necessary efforts to obtain this record. Second, the Board finds that an additional VA medical examination is necessary. During the September 2013 VA examination, audiometric testing showed that the Veteran’s hearing loss did not rise to the level of disability under section 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Martinez-Boden v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 393 (2020). Nonetheless, at his February 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his hearing acuity had worsened since 2013. His representative therefore requested a new examination to determine whether the Veteran now has a current hearing loss disability for VA purposes in either or both ears. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. After obtaining the necessary information and authorization from the Veteran, undertake the necessary efforts to obtain the results of the 1998 hearing test the Veteran underwent during the course of his employment as a machinist at a bakery. (Continued on the next page)   2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his claimed bilateral hearing loss. After examining the Veteran and reviewing the relevant evidence of record, the examiner should provide an opinion, with supporting rationale, as to the following: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any current hearing loss disability identified on examination is causally related to noise exposure during the Veteran’s period of INACDUTRA from March 1980 to June 1980? K. Conner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Penn, 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.