Citation Nr: 21025303
Decision Date: 04/27/21	Archive Date: 04/27/21

DOCKET NO. 16-33 899
DATE: April 27, 2021

REMANDED

The appeal as to whether new and material evidence has been received to reopen a previously denied claim for entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from July 1969 to July 1971.  

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (BVA or Board) from a January 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A notice of disagreement was received in June 2016 and a statement of the case was issued in June 2016. A VA Form 9 was received in July 2016. 

Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that due process is followed and that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran’s claim so that he is afforded every possible consideration. 

Since issuance of the statement of the case in June 2016, additional medical evidence relevant to the issue on appeal has been associated with the Veteran’s claims file. Specifically, a private medical opinion submitted by the Veteran was added to the clams file after the June 2016 statement of the case, but was not considered by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) before the Veteran’s appeal was transferred to the Board in August 2016. 

The Board notes that applicable VA regulations require that pertinent evidence received by the RO prior to the transfer of the matter to the Board must be referred to the appropriate rating or authorization activity for review and preparation of a supplemental statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 19.37. Accordingly, as the record does not show that the AOJ readjudicated the claim with consideration of the additional, relevant evidence of record received prior to transfer of the appeal to the Board, a remand is required for the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31, 19.37.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

After undertaking any development deemed appropriate, the AOJ must readjudicate the issue on appeal, to include consideration of the additional evidence obtained since it last adjudicated this claim. 

Specific consideration should be given to all evidence received since the June 2016 statement of the case, to specifically include the private medical opinion received in July 2016. 

If the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, a supplemental statement of the case should be issued. The Veteran must be afforded an opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board.

								(continued on next page) 

 

TANYA SMITH

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	L. Andersen, 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.