Citation Nr: 21026070 Decision Date: 04/29/21 Archive Date: 04/29/21 DOCKET NO. 16-47 709 DATE: April 29, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1966 to January 1970. The Veteran appeared at a Board hearing in March 2021; a transcript is of record. During the Board hearing, the undersigned Veterans Law Judge clarified the issues on appeal, identified potential evidentiary defects, and clarified the type of evidence that would support the Veteran’s claim. The actions of the Veterans Law Judge supplement the Veterans Claims Assistance Act (VCAA) and comply with any related duties owed during a hearing. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.103. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. The Board must remand this claim for further evidentiary development. The Veteran’s service treatment records include a “separation examination” for the Veteran from June 1969. While the separation examination appears to be the Veteran’s examination, thorough review of the record indicates that it is not. In particular, the June 1969 separation examination lists a different Social Security number, date of birth, place of birth, and home address for the Veteran. These differences are highlighted when reviewing the Veteran’s entrance examination, which lists his proper Social Security number, date of birth, place of birth, and home address. The Board concludes that the June 1969 separation examination included in the service treatment records does not belong to the Veteran. Review of the Compensation and Pension examinations from August 2011 and particularly March 2015 rely on the June 1969 separation examination for their respective denials of the issues currently before the Board. In particular, the March 2015 examiner quotes specifically from the June 1969 examination, stating that “The 06/13/1969 medical report also asked if there were ‘ear, nose, or throat trouble,’ ‘running ears,’ or ‘hearing loss’ with no marked for each question.” The March 2015 examiner goes on to cite the denial of ear problems upon separation as a reason that both bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were less likely than not related to service. The Board also notes that the Veteran testified that he started receiving treatment for his hearing in “the early 2000s.” However, the Veteran’s file contains medical records starting from approximately 2010. The AOJ should submit a request to the Veteran for any additional medical files. The current rating decision is tainted as it considered the records of another person. As such, the Board finds it proper to remand for obtaining any missing records and for new medical opinions. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ must review the record and determine which records belong to this Veteran versus another Veteran. Appropriate action should be taken, to include forwarding the improper records to the appropriate place. All internal procedures are to be followed. 2. Request the service personnel record file and attempt to obtain a copy of any service treatment records pertaining to a period of active service from February 1966 to January 1970. If the requested records are unavailable, notify the Veteran of such and of alternate sources of evidence that can supplement the available records. He must then be given an opportunity to respond. 3. Contact the Veteran requesting any relevant private treatment records, or authorization to obtain such records. 4. Return the claims file to the March 2015 VA examiner, or, if not possible, an examiner of appropriate expertise to issue an opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss disability. The examiner should review any service treatment records and be aware for any data that is inconsistent with the Veteran’s personal information (such as incorrect identifying information, of particular note dates of birth). Based on a review of the record, the examiner should: (a.) Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. probability of 50 percent or greater) that bilateral hearing loss is related to the Veteran’s active service. (b.) Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e. probability of 50 percent or greater) that tinnitus is related to the Veteran’s active service. A complete rationale for any opinion expressed should be provided in a report. A corrective rating decision should be prepared that considers the records of this Veteran versus another person. As noted above, the prior rating decision is tainted by the use of irrelevant records. An appropriate SSOC should be prepared. H. N. SCHWARTZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Jonah Nelson, 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.