Citation Nr: 22014497 Decision Date: 03/14/22 Archive Date: 03/14/22 DOCKET NO. 17-31 079 DATE: March 14, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from July 1987 to November 1987 and from January 3, 1991, to January 25, 1991. He had additional duty with the West Virginia Army National Guard. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is remanded. The Veteran contends that service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is warranted as the claimed disabilities are due to his in service weapons fire noise exposure. The Veteran's complete periods of active duty, active duty for training, and inactive duty for training with the West Virginia Army National Guard have not been verified and the service treatment records have not been requested for incorporation into the record. A SSA Inquiry states that the Veteran is in receipt of Social Security Administration (SSA) disability benefits. The evidence considered by the SSA in granting the Veteran's claim is not of record. The Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) duty to assist the Veteran includes an obligation to obtain the records from the SSA. Masors v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 181, 187 188 (1992). The report of the January 2021 audiological examination conducted for VA states that the Veteran was diagnosed with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus. The examiner concluded that "he could not determine a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss without resorting to speculation." The Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) observes that the phrase "without resort to speculation" should indicate the limitations of knowledge in the medical community at large and not those of a particular examiner." Jones v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382 (2010). The opinion in the January 2021 VA audiological examination report expresses the examiner's limitations. VA's duty to assist includes, in appropriate cases, the duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination which is accurate and fully descriptive. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006); Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121, 124 (1991). When VA undertakes to obtain an evaluation, it must ensure that the evaluation is adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). Further VA audiological evaluation is needed. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the National Personnel Record Center (NPRC) and/or the appropriate service entity and request that (1) the Veteran's periods of active duty, active duty for training, and inactive duty for training with the West Virginia Army National Guard be verified and all available service treatment records associated with that duty be forwarded for incorporation into the record. 2. Contact the SSA and request that documentation of the Veteran's award of disability benefits and copies of all records developed in association with the decision. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA audiological examination to assist in determining the nature of the any identified bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus and their relationship to active service. A rationale for all opinions should be provided. The examiner should: (a) Diagnose all hearing loss and tinnitus disabilities found. (b) Opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that any identified hearing loss disability and tinnitus had its onset during active service or is related to any incident of service, including the Veteran's in service exposure to weapons fire. J. T. HUTCHESON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Emily A. Kotroco 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.