Citation Nr: 22018570 Decision Date: 03/29/22 Archive Date: 03/29/22 DOCKET NO. 17-49 677 DATE: March 29, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for right hear hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the U.S. Army from February 1976 to February 1979. He also served from March 1981 to February 1983; he was discharged from that period under other than honorable conditions. In a July 2013 administrative decision, VA determined that the character of his discharge for that second period is a bar to benefits for any disabilities related to that period. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board remanded the matter for further development in April 2019 and November 2021. Pursuant to the Board's remand directives, a new VA medical opinion was obtained in December 2021. The examiner found that the Veteran's hearing loss is less likely than not related to service. In support of that finding, the examiner first noted that the discharge examination from 1983 was not available for review (which is true, as will be discussed). The examiner then stated that the Veteran did not have a significant shift in hearing while in service. The examiner further stated that auditory damage and hearing loss cannot be linked to service based on military noise exposure alone; there must be a "nexus of auditory damage to relate current hearing loss to military noise," and not to another etiology. Significantly, the Veteran's service personnel records have been obtained, but efforts to obtain his service treatment records have been unavailing. These efforts have included contacting the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), which responded in March 2015 that all available records had been sent to be scanned for uploading to the electronic file, and the Records Management Center (RMC), which responded in April in April 2013 that it had been unable to locate the requested records. In an October 2019 letter, VA notified the Veteran that it had been unable to obtain his service treatment records, and that he should submit any such records in his possession. The letter also invited to submit evidence that might substitute for the service treatment records, and given examples of the types of such evidence he could submit. Accordingly, the Board finds that further efforts to obtain the service treatment records would be futile, and thus are not warranted. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). Although the Veteran's service treatment records are missing, the file does contain the February 1976 entrance examination for his first period of service, and the January 1981 entrance examination for his second period of service. Both examinations include audiograms. While the separation examination for the Veteran's first period of service has not been found, the 1981 entrance examination is dated only two years after separation from that period. Presumably, the audiometric findings in that report would be similar to those at the time of separation in 1979. Thus, the audiogram in that report should be considered to help determine whether it supports service connection for right ear hearing loss when compared to the 1976 audiogram. As indicated in the VA medical opinions obtained in this case, puretone threshold shifts are a relevant factor in assessing whether hearing loss was incurred in active service. Because the character of discharge for the Veteran's second period of service is a bar to benefits, as discussed above, the fact that his separation audiogram for that period is not of record should not affect the determination of whether service connection may be established for hearing loss based on his first period of service. As the December 2021 VA medical opinion did not address whether a significant puretone threshold shift is shown when comparing the 1976 and 1981 audiograms, or explain why the absence of a significant shift weighs against a link between hearing loss and in-service noise exposure, a new VA medical opinion is warranted. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain a new VA medical opinion as to the likelihood that the Veteran's right ear hearing loss is linked to any noise exposure from his first period of service, which was from February 1976 to February 1979. The Veteran's second period of service must be disregarded. The examiner should compare the February 1976 entrance audiogram for the Veteran's first period of service with the 1981 entrance examination for his second period of service, and determine whether or not they show a significant puretone threshold shift. The examiner must also explain the clinical significance of such as it relates to whether the Veteran's hearing loss was caused by in-service noise exposure. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Rutkin, 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.