Citation Nr: 0814046 Decision Date: 04/29/08 Archive Date: 05/08/08 DOCKET NO. 06-07 669 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Jackson, Mississippi THE ISSUE Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. C. Mackenzie, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from March 1967 to March 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2005 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Jackson, Mississippi. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the veteran if further action is required. REMAND The veteran appeared at a Travel Board hearing at the Jackson VARO in August 2007, at which time he asserted that his bilateral hearing loss disability had gotten worse since his last VA audiological examination in August 2005. He submitted records of recent audiological testing from his employer. An October 2006 examination demonstrates that the veteran has a higher puretone threshold average in each ear than was found on the August 2005 VA examination. Unfortunately, the examinations conducted by the veteran's employer do not include the testing for speech discrimination required in order to evaluate the veteran's disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 (2007). The VA General Counsel has indicated that an additional examination is warranted in cases where there is an assertion of a worsening disability. In this case, the veteran's assertion is supported by the additional evidence he has submitted. See VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (April 7, 1995). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. A letter should be sent to the veteran explaining, in terms of 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5103 and 5103A, the need for additional evidence regarding his claim. The letter must inform the veteran about the information and evidence that is necessary to substantiate the claim, notify him of the type of evidence that VA will seek to provide, inform him of the type of evidence that he is expected to provide, and request that he provide any and all relevant evidence currently in his possession. Pursuant to Vazquez-Flores v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 37 (2008), it is essential that: (1) this letter notify the veteran that to substantiate an increased evaluation claim he must provide, or ask VA to obtain, medical or lay evidence demonstrating a worsening or increase in severity of the disability and the effect that worsening has on his employment and daily life; (2) if the diagnostic code under which he is rated for a specific disorder contains criteria necessary for entitlement to a higher disability rating that would not be satisfied by demonstrating a noticeable worsening or increase in severity of the disability and the effect of that worsening has on his employment and daily life (such as a specific measurement or test result), the Secretary must provide at least general notice of that requirement to him; (3) he must be notified that, should an increase in disability be found, a disability rating will be determined by applying relevant diagnostic codes; and (4) the notice must also provide examples of the types of medical and lay evidence that he may submit (or ask VA to obtain) that are relevant to establishing entitlement to increased compensation. Id. The veteran should also be notified that, in cases where service connection is granted, both a disability evaluation and an effective date for that evaluation will be granted. See Dingess/Hartman v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006). 2. Then, the veteran should be afforded a VA audiological examination, and the examiner is requested to review the entire claims file in conjunction with the examination. This examination should encompass pure tone threshold and Maryland CNC speech recognition testing. To the extent that the findings of this examination are not consistent with the employment records (audiological testing) submitted by the veteran at his August 2007 hearing, that discrepancy should be addressed by the examiner. A complete rationale should be given for all opinions and conclusions expressed in a typewritten report. 3. After completion of the above development, the veteran's claim of entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss should be readjudicated. If the determination remains less than fully favorable to the veteran, he and his representative should be furnished with a Supplemental Statement of the Case and given an opportunity to respond. Then, if indicated, this case should be returned to the Board for the purpose of appellate disposition. The veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on this matter. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). (CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE) This appeal 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. 2006). _________________________________________________ JOHN L. PRICHARD Acting 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).