Citation Nr: 21061566
Decision Date: 10/04/21	Archive Date: 10/04/21

DOCKET NO. 15-04 789
DATE: October 4, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

Entitlement to a total disability evaluation based on individual unemployability based on service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from October 1968 to September 1970.  His awards and decorations include the Combat Action Ribbon and the Purple Heart.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from May 2012 and February 2015 rating decisions issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in July 2018.  A transcript of the proceeding has been associated with the claims file.

The Board remanded the case for further development in December 2018.  The case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review.

Upon review, the Board finds that additional development is needed prior to adjudication of the issues on appeal.

In the December 2018 remand, the Board noted that an audiogram was performed in January 2018 at a VA medical center, but the actual audiogram results were not of record.  In addition, the Board noted that it was unclear whether the speech discrimination testing used during that evaluation was the Maryland CNC test.  Upon remand, the AOJ was instructed to obtain a copy of the January 2018 VA audiogram and any corresponding report.  Since the December 2018 remand, copies of the January 2018 VA treatment record have been associated with the record, which indicate that the audiometric summary is available in PRS tools/audiogram display; however, the audiogram results are still not associated with the claims file. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (holding that a remand confers on the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand order). 

Moreover, the issue of entitlement to TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the increased evaluation issue, as this claim could also affect the outcome of the TDIU claim.  See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (noting that the prohibition against the adjudication of claims that are inextricably intertwined is based upon the recognition that claims related to each other should not be subject to piecemeal decision-making or appellate litigation).  Accordingly, a remand is required for the AOJ to adjudicate the inextricably intertwined issues. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1.  The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) should request that the Veteran provide the names and addresses of any and all health care providers who have provided treatment for his bilateral hearing loss.  After acquiring this information and obtaining any necessary authorization, the AOJ should obtain and associate these records with the claims file.

The AOJ should also obtain any outstanding VA medical records and any audiograms located in CPRS Tools/Audiogram Display, to specifically include the . January 2018 audiogram results.  If the audiogram results are not available, it should be documented in the claims file.

2.  After completing the foregoing development, the AOJ should consider whether the Veteran is entitled to TDIU.  In so doing, the AOJ may decide to pursue further development of the Veteran's employment history and/or obtain additional medical evidence or a medical opinion, as deemed necessary. 

3.  The AOJ should ensure compliance with the prior directives and conduct any other development as may be indicated. 

 

 

J.W. ZISSIMOS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. DeVerter, Associate Counsel

The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.