Citation Nr: 21029168 Decision Date: 05/12/21 Archive Date: 05/12/21 DOCKET NO. 17-07 447 DATE: May 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Although the Board 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. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The Veteran had active military service from February 1976 to February 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from the November 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was previously before the Board in December 2020 and was remanded for further development. The Veteran appeared at a September 2019 hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is remanded. The Veteran contends that his hearing loss is related to his military service. As noted above, this matter was previously before the Board in December 2020 and was remanded for the Veteran to undergo another VA examination. Subsequently, in March 2021, the Veteran underwent a VA hearing loss and tinnitus examination. The examiner noted that the Veteran is diagnosed with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The examiner noted that the Veteran reported excessive noise from generators, refueling tankers, the flight line, weapons, and driving tankers to the flight line. However, the examiner stated that the Veteran maintained normal hearing for VA purposes through at least 2016. The examiner stated that although the Veteran has conceded noise exposure and that the relationship between noise, auditory damage, and hearing loss is well documented, auditory damage and hearing loss are not conceded based on noise alone. Therefore, the examiner stated that a nexus is not established. However, the Board finds the March 2021 opinion to be inadequate. The Board finds that the examiner did not provide an adequate rationale. Specifically, the examiner did not properly explain the relationship between noise, auditory damage, and hearing loss for purposes of the opinion given. Therefore, a remand is warranted for an addendum opinion to be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain an addendum opinion by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's hearing loss. The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's hearing loss is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including the Veteran's conceded noise exposure. The examiner should address whether there could be delayed onset of hearing loss. All opinions provided must be thoroughly explained and an adequate rationale for any conclusions reached must be provided. The examiner must consider the Veteran's lay statements. The examiner should not rely on the absence of evidence of in-service treatment or injury in the Veteran's service treatment records as a basis for any given opinion. If any requested opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation, the medical professional should state and explain why an opinion cannot be provided without resort to speculation. 2. Following completion of the above, and a review of any additional evidence received, the RO should also undertake any other development it deems to be necessary, to include, if warranted, an addendum medical opinion which considers any newly received evidence. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Mountford, 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.