Citation Nr: 0813873 Decision Date: 04/25/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 05-28 525 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in St. Petersburg, Florida THE ISSUE Entitlement to a total rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). REPRESENTATION Veteran represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Helena M. Walker, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from January 1953 to April 1953. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2004 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida, which denied the benefit sought on appeal. The Board remanded the veteran's claim in a June 2007 decision and referred the issue of entitlement to TDIU to the Director of Compensation and Pension for review. In a January 2008 Supplemental Statement of the Case, the RO again denied TDIU as the veteran did not meet the schedular thresholds for entitlement to TDIU and was found to be able to maintain and secure gainful employment. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND In light of the VCAA, further evidentiary development is necessary. The veteran is currently rated at 50 percent for bilateral hearing loss and 10 percent for tinnitus. His combined disability rating is 60 percent. In April 2007, the veteran underwent a VA audiological examination and puretone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 100 100 100 100 100 LEFT 40 65 60 70 85 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 84 percent in the left ear and no response in the right ear. In February 2008, the veteran submitted a VA audiological report. The veteran's puretone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 90 105+ 105+ 105+ 105+ LEFT 60 90 90 95 100 It appears that the speech recognition test performed on the veteran was the CID W-22 speech recognition test. Upon review of the evidence of record, the Board finds insufficient evidence upon which to render its decision. According to the February 2008 VA audiological report, the veteran's left ear hearing acuity appears to have worsened from his April 2007 VA audiological examination. The February 2008 report, however, reflects use of a speech recognition test that cannot be used for VA rating purposes. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. The Board notes that an increased rating claim for bilateral hearing loss is not before it, but the recently submitted evidence bears directly on whether the veteran meets the schedular thresholds for entitlement to TDIU. Additionally, the new evidence may impact whether the veteran is capable of maintaining and securing gainful employment. Thus, the claim must be remanded and a VA examination scheduled to determine whether the veteran's current hearing disability has worsened and renders him unable to maintain and secure gainful employment. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Request and obtain all outstanding medical records related to the veteran's hearing disability and employability. Perform all development deemed necessary. 2. Schedule the veteran for an audiological examination to determine his current level of hearing disability. The examiner should ensure that the Maryland CNC test is used in determining his speech recognition abilities. 3. Schedule the veteran for an examination to determine the impact of his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus on his ability to secure or follow substantially gainful employment. The examiner should review the claims folder and report all limitations caused by the service- connected disabilities. The examiner should then render an opinion as to whether the veteran's service-connected disabilities hinder him from securing or following substantially gainful employment. All opinions rendered must be supported by complete rationale. 4. When the requested development has been completed, the case should be reviewed on the basis of the additional evidence. If the benefits sought are not granted, the veteran and his representative should be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case, and be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. The purpose of this REMAND is to cure an evidentiary defect and the Board does not intimate any opinion as to the merits of the case, either favorable or unfavorable, at this time. The veteran is free to submit any additional evidence and/or argument he desires to have considered in connection with his current appeal. No action is required of the veteran until he is notified. This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ MARK W. GREENSTREET Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).