Citation Nr: 1318969 Decision Date: 06/11/13 Archive Date: 06/21/13 DOCKET NO. 03-05 128 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix, Arizona THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss, to include as secondary to service-connected sinusitis and/or allergic rhinitis. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL The Veteran ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. Giannecchini, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active military service from December 1980 to December 1984. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2001 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Phoenix, Arizona. In February 2005, the Veteran testified before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) during a Travel Board hearing at the RO. A transcript of that hearing is of record. In September 2006, the Board remanded the Veteran's claim for additional development. Following the development requested, the Board denied the Veteran's claim in February 2009. The Veteran appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In April 2010, the parties to the appeal filed a Joint Motion for Remand. That same month, the Court granted the motion and remanded the matter to the Board. In July 2011, the Board again remanded the Veteran's claim on appeal for additional development. Following the development requested, the RO issued a Supplement Statement of the Case (SSOC) in November 2012, continuing the denial of the Veteran's claim. The claim has since been returned to the Board for further appellate review. Also, the Board notified the Veteran in April 2013 that the VLJ who had conducted the February 2005 hearing was no longer employed by the Board. The Veteran was offered an opportunity to testify at another hearing. In May 2013, the Veteran notified the Board that she did not wish another hearing. 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 In her above noted May 2013 response letter regarding an additional Board hearing, the Veteran included the following: Have recent hearing exam at the Prescott VAMC along with new hearing aids. Would you please consider this before making a decision. The Board notes that the Veteran last underwent a VA C&P audiological examination in August 2011. Otherwise, the physical claims file reflects VA outpatient treatment records dated no later than April 2010. A review of the Veteran's Virtual VA electronic file does not reflect VA outpatient treatment records. In light of the Veteran's report of additional VA medical evidence that would appear to be pertinent to her claim on appeal, a remand is in order to obtain any available VA outpatient treatment records dated since April 2010. This should include any records from the VA Medical Center (VAMC) in Prescott, Arizona, associated with the Veteran's reported audiological (hearing) examination or her evaluation for new hearing aids. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Supplement the record on appeal with available VA treatment records dated from April 2010 associated with the Veteran's treatment through the VA Health Care System. This should include any records from the VAMC Prescott pertaining to a recent audiological examination and/or evaluation for new hearing aids, as reported by the Veteran. 2. After the above has been completed, undertake any additional evidentiary development deemed appropriate. If warranted by any evidence received, an addendum medical opinion should be sought from the August 2011 VA examiner and/or the November 2012 ENT specialist who provided opinions concerning the Veteran's claim. Thereafter, re-adjudicate the issue on appeal, as is listed on the title page of this Remand. If the benefit sought is denied, the Veteran and her representative must be provided an SSOC and given an opportunity to respond before the case is returned to the Board for appellate review. The Veteran 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 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. 2012). _________________________________________________ KATHLEEN K. GALLAGHER 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) (2012).