Citation Nr: 22010566 Decision Date: 02/24/22 Archive Date: 02/24/22 DOCKET NO. 19-08 409 DATE: February 24, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability is REMANDED. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably in the United States Army from September 1970 to January 1971. Upon review of the record, the Board concludes that further evidentiary development is necessary. Although the Board sincerely regrets this delay and is appreciative of the Veteran's service to his country, a remand is necessary to ensure VA provides the Veteran with appropriate assistance in developing his claim prior to final adjudication. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. In May 2016, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 21-526EZ. Thereby, the Veteran initiated a claim for service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability. In January 2019, the Veteran's treatment records from the Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center (VAMC) were associated with the claim file. Therein, the Veteran was noted to have a hearing aid issued. However, after review, the Board notes that the VAMC records do not identify the etiology of any currently endured hearing loss endured by the Veteran. In October 2021, the Veteran supplied sworn testimony to the undersigned Veterans' Law Judge (VLJ). At that time, the Veteran reported that he had been using hearing aids for a number of years, and the last set was provided by the VA. The Veteran testified that he was unable to get a current hearing evaluation due to COVID. The Veteran testified that his wife believes his hearing was diminished during the four years since he was last evaluated at a VA facility. The Veteran testified that his father was an audiologist, who checked his ears during the decade following active-duty service, and his father identified (mainly) left ear hearing loss during that time period. At this time, the Board recognizes that the Veteran has not undergone a VA examination that addresses the nature and etiology of any currently endured bilateral hearing loss. The VAMC treatment records, and the Veteran's audiologist father, suggest that he has hearing loss disability. However, the claims file is devoid of an examination report that identifies the etiology of any hearing loss currently endured by the Veteran. On remand, the AOJ should schedule and secure a VA examination that address the nature and etiology of any hearing loss currently endured by the Veteran during the claim period. Consequently, the matter is REMANDED to the AOJ for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran, and, with his assistance, identify any outstanding records of pertinent medical treatment from VA, Federal, or private health care providers. With the Veteran's assistance obtain copies of any pertinent records and add them to the claims file. Follow the procedures for obtaining the records set forth by 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (c). If VA attempts to obtain any outstanding records which are unavailable, the Veteran should be notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e). 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to addresses the nature and etiology of any currently endured hearing loss. The claims file should be made available to, and be reviewed by, the examiner, and it should be confirmed that such records were reviewed. The examiner should: For any current hearing loss identified, indicate whether the disability is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) related to the Veteran's Army service. An explanation for all opinions expressed must be provided. All opinions must take into account the Veteran's own history and contentions. 3. The AOJ must ensure that the examination report requested above is in compliance with the directives of this remand. If any report or opinion is deficient in any manner, the AOJ must implement corrective procedures at once. 4. Thereafter, the AOJ should consider all of the evidence of record and readjudicate the claim for service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability. If the benefit sought is not granted, the AOJ must then issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) and allow the Veteran and his representative an opportunity to respond. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board RLBJ, 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.