Citation Nr: 18150559
Decision Date: 11/15/18	Archive Date: 11/15/18

DOCKET NO. 15-10 160A
DATE:	November 15, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The Veteran had active duty service from September 1978 to November 1979 and from February 2003 to July 2004.  
The Board remanded this case in March 2017 to schedule the Veteran for a Board hearing via videoconference.  There was substantial compliance with the Board’s remand directives.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).  The Board again remanded the case in July 2018 to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current severity of his bilateral hearing loss symptoms.  
The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) via videoconference in June 2017.  A transcript of the hearing is included in the claims file.
In September 2018, the Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) with the Agency of Original Jurisdiction’s (AOJ’s) August 2018 rating decision disagreeing with the evaluation and effective date assigned for the grant of service connection for erectile dysfunction (ED).  While cognizant of the holding in Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999), the Board will not undertake review of these matters at this time as the record indicates that the AOJ is diligently developing these claims, and the matters have not been certified for appellate review. 
The Board will again remand the Veteran’s increased rating claim for bilateral hearing loss to afford him another VA examination to determine the current severity of this disability.  Following the Board’s July 2018 remand directives, the Veteran underwent a VA audiological examination in September 2018, during which the examiner determined that the puretone thresholds in decibels, as well as the speech discrimination scores using the Maryland CNC Test, were not valid or not appropriate for the Veteran.  The Board determines that these puretone thresholds and speech discrimination scores are not adequate to rate the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability.  See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.385, 4.85, Diagnostic Code (DC) 6100 (2017).  
In October 2018 and November 2018 statements, the Veteran and his attorney requested that the Veteran be afforded another VA examination to determine the current severity of his bilateral hearing loss symptoms.  Moreover, the Veteran stated in the November 2018 statement that he was ill when examined in September 2018.  Thus, the Veteran should be afforded a new VA audiological examination to determine the current severity of his bilateral hearing loss.  
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
Schedule the Veteran for an appropriate VA audiological examination to evaluate the current severity of his bilateral hearing loss symptoms.  
The Veteran’s claims file should be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination.  The examiner should identify and describe all current symptomatology.  The examiner should provide a detailed review of the Veteran’s current complaints, as well as findings as to the nature, extent, and severity of symptoms caused by the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss.
 
A. P. SIMPSON
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	A. Hodzic, Counsel