Citation Nr: 1321713 Decision Date: 07/08/13 Archive Date: 07/18/13 DOCKET NO. 10-22 876 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Louisville, Kentucky THE ISSUE Entitlement to an initial compensable disability evaluation for service-connected bilateral hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States WITNESSES AT HEARING ON APPEAL Veteran and Spouse ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. G. Alderman, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1971 to February 1975. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2009 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Louisville, Kentucky. The Veteran and his wife appeared and provided testimony before the Board in October 2010. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. 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 Reasons for Remand: To obtain updated VA treatment records and to schedule a VA examination to determine the current severity of the bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran seeks an initial compensable rating for his bilateral hearing loss. He was afforded a VA examination in August 2009; however, in October 2010, during his hearing before the Board, the Veteran and his wife testified that his hearing had worsened since that examination. See October 2010 Transcript, page 7. The Veteran also testified that he would try to have his VA primary care physician schedule a new hearing test; therefore, the Board left the record open for 60 days to allow for the evaluation and the submission of the audiology report. As of July 2013, updated audiology test results have not been submitted for review. When a Veteran alleges that his service-connected disability has worsened since he was previously examined, a new examination may be required to evaluate the current degree of impairment. Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400 (1997); Caffrey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 377 (1994); VAOPGCPREC 11-95 (1995). Given the fact that the Veteran's hearing was last examined by VA approximately four years ago, and in light of his assertions that his condition has worsened, the Board finds that a more contemporaneous examination is needed. See Weggenmann v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 281, 284 (1993). In addition, VA treatment records dated since December 15, 2010, if any, must also be obtained from the Mountain Home VA Medical Center (VAMC) and be associated with the Veteran's claims file. The Veteran is hereby notified that it is his responsibility to report for any scheduled examination and to cooperate in the development of the case, and that the consequences of failing to report for a VA examination without good cause may include denial of the claim. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.158 and 3.655 (2012). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's complete record of treatment from the Mountain Home VAMC from December 15, 2010 to the present. 2. Thereafter, afford the Veteran a VA examination to ascertain the severity and manifestations of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. Any and all studies, tests, and evaluations deemed necessary by the examiner, including the Maryland CNC test and a puretone audiometry test, should be performed. The examiner is requested to review all pertinent records associated with the claims file and to comment on the severity of the Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss. The examiner should report all signs and symptoms necessary for rating the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss under the applicable rating criteria, 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.85 and 4.86. The examiner must comment as to the impact of bilateral hearing loss on the Veteran's daily activities and his occupational functioning, even if not currently employed. A clear rationale for all opinions would be helpful and a discussion of the facts and medical principles involved would be of considerable assistance to the Board. Since it is important "that each disability be viewed in relation to its history [,]" 38 C.F.R. § 4.1 (2012), copies of all pertinent records in the Veteran's physical and/or Virtual VA claims file, or in the alternative, the claims file, must be made available to the examiner for review. 3. When the development requested has been completed, the case should be reviewed by the RO/AMC on the basis of additional evidence. If the benefit sought is not granted to the fullest extent, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) 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 obtain additional development, and the Board does not intimate any opinion as to the merits of the case, either favorable or unfavorable, at this time. The Veteran has the right to submit additional evidence and/or argument on the matter the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). 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. 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).