Citation Nr: 18141133 Decision Date: 10/09/18 Archive Date: 10/09/18 DOCKET NO. 16-16 298 DATE: October 9, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Marines Corps from August 1969 to January 1970. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board acknowledges that the Veteran filed a claim for entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) received by VA in September 2018. The Board’s review of the claims file reveals that the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) is in the process of taking action on this claim. As such, the Board will not take any further action on the matter at this time. Entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Initially, the Board notes that following the March 2016 statement of the case, VA added additional medical evidence to the Veteran’s file. The Veteran attended a VA examination in October 2018 for an evaluation of his hearing loss disability as part of the development of his claim for TDIU. Pertinent evidence is initially reviewed by the AOJ. Additional pertinent evidence that becomes available after the RO’s statement of the case but prior to certification to the Board is to be addressed in an additional supplemental statement of the case. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31(b). After certification to the Board, such evidence must be referred back to the AOJ for initial review. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c). Exceptions are when the Veteran or his representative waives this review right, or when the Board grants the benefit being sought in full. Id. In the Veteran’s case, the additional evidence added to the Veteran’s file is pertinent to his claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss. As the Veteran’s claim is being remanded to the AOJ for further development as is noted below, the AOJ will have an opportunity to review all of the additional evidence following the March 2016 statement of the case. Accordingly, appellate review may proceed without prejudice to the Veteran. A review of the medical evidence of record illustrates there are outstanding relevant VA treatment records. An October 2015 audiology consultation at a VA treatment facility indicates the Veteran underwent audiometric testing at that time. The audiomentric test results are not of record. Any VA treatment records are within VA’s constructive possession, and are considered potentially relevant to the Veteran’s increased rating claim for bilateral hearing loss. A remand is required to allow VA to obtain them and for consideration of any additional evidence added to the file since the March 2016 statement of the case. This matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain VA treatment records from May 2018 to the present, including the results of any audiometry testing completed during this time period that has not already been associated with the claims file. In particular, obtain the VA audiometric testing conducted on October 2, 2015 that is not currently associated with the Veteran’s file. Contact the Veteran and afford him the opportunity to identify or submit any pertinent evidence in support of his claim, to include records of any private treatment. Based on his response, attempt to procure copies of all records which have not been obtained from identified treatment sources. If any of the records requested are unavailable, clearly document the claims file to that effect and notify the Veteran of any inability to obtain these records, in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 2. Readjudicate the Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss in light of all the evidence of record, in particular any evidence added to the record since the March 2016 statement of the case. Any further development deemed necessary should be completed prior to readjudication. If any benefit on appeal remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. M. SORISIO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Breitbach, Associate Counsel