Citation Nr: 1305478 Decision Date: 02/14/13 Archive Date: 02/21/13 DOCKET NO. 09-13 812 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Chicago, Illinois THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Vietnam Veterans of America ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Connolly, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from September 1966 to September 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2006 rating decision by the Chicago, Illinois Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In March 2012, the Board remanded the issue remaining on appeal. 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 Unfortunately, a remand is required in this case. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, it is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claim so that the Veteran is afforded every possible consideration. Per the Board's March 2012 remand, the Veteran was afforded a VA audiological examination in April 2011. Although the examiner attempted to conduct the appropriate testing, it was invalid. It was noted by the examiner that the Veteran denied having any difficulty with his hearing, but his puretone averages on the audiogram were 56 Hertz for the right ear and 60 Hertz for the left ear. Speech reception thresholds were 40 and 35 decibels, respectively. The word recognition scores were 96 and 100 percent, respectively, which the examiner felt were inconsistent and suggested thresholds that were higher than expected. The examiner further stated that the test results were inconsistent and might suggest non-organic hearing loss. The examiner said that the Veteran denied any hearing difficulties, but despite reinstruction, offered thresholds that would suggest a moderate to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss. The examiner indicated that the Veteran did not have any difficulty understanding the speaker and conversed easily. Thereafter, the Veteran's inservice noise exposure was conceded on this examination by the examiner who opined that his tinnitus was related to service. Service connection for tinnitus was subsequently granted. In the January 2013 informal hearing presentation, the Veteran's representative requested a remand for the Veteran to be afforded a new VA audiological evaluation due to the inconsistencies in the recent VA examination report. The Board agrees that the examination is not entirely clear due to the confusing test results. As such, the Veteran should be afforded the requested VA examination. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA audiological examination. The claims file must be made available to the examiner and the examiner should indicate in his/her report whether or not the claims file was reviewed. Any indicated tests should be accomplished. The examiner should obtain the Veteran's auditory thresholds at frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz, as well as speech recognition scores based on the Maryland CNC tests. The examiner should take into consideration the Veteran's statements regarding his in-service noise exposure, which VA has conceded. The examiner should opine as to whether it is more likely than not, less likely than not, or at least as likely as not, that current hearing loss is related to service or was manifest within one year of service. A rationale for any opinion expressed should be provided. 2. The AMC should review the medical opinion obtained above to ensure that the remand directives have been accomplished. If all questions posed are not answered or sufficiently answered, AMC should return the case to the examiner for completion of the inquiry. 3. The AMC should then readjudicate the claim on appeal in light of all of the evidence of record. If the issue remains denied, the Veteran should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case as to the issue on appeal, and afforded a reasonable period of time within which to respond thereto. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). 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 2002 & Supp. 2012). _________________________________________________ K. PARAKKAL Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002 & Supp. 2012), 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) (2012).