Citation Nr: 21062684 Decision Date: 10/08/21 Archive Date: 10/08/21 DOCKET NO. 10-04 844 DATE: October 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased rating greater than 30 percent for service-connected bilateral hearing loss prior to February 15, 2018, a rating greater than 40 percent from February 15, 2018 to December 22, 2020, and an increased rating greater than 50 percent, thereafter, is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected bilateral hearing loss, to include on an extra-schedular basis pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1970 to April 1971. In June 2018, the Board denied the Veteran's higher rating claim for service-connected bilateral hearing loss and TDIU claim. The Veteran appealed the Board's June 2018 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a July 2019 Joint Motion for Remand Order, the Court vacated and remanded the June 2018 Board decision as to the denial of the claims. In a January 2020 Board decision, the matters were remanded for additional development. Specifically, the Board determined that September 2008, January 2010, and November 2012 Maryland CNC speech discrimination testing results were missing from the claims file. For the reasons discussed below, the matters must again be remanded. 1. Entitlement to an increased rating greater than 30 percent for service-connected bilateral hearing loss prior to February 15, 2018, a rating greater than 40 percent from February 15, 2018 to December 22, 2020, and an increased rating greater than 50 percent, thereafter, is remanded. While the Board regrets further delay, the matter must be remanded for further development. As stated in the January 2020 Board decision, September 2008, January 2010, and November 2012 Maryland CNC speech discrimination testing results were not associated to the claims file. The matter was remanded to obtain those records. In May 2020 and June 2020, the September 2008, January 2010, and November 2012 VA examinations were added to the record. Regarding the January 2010 and November 2012 examinations, the Board finds that there has been substantial compliance with obtaining those records. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Review of the examinations reflects that NU-6 word list testing were used in his January 2010 and November 2012 audiological evaluations. However, the September 2008 examination does not indicate which word list testing was used. Therefore, the Board must remand the matter to determine which word list testing was used during the Veteran's September 2008 examination. Additionally, review of the Veteran's July 2009 and March 2016 private audiological evaluations do not indicate which word list testing was used. The Board is not competent to determine which word recognition scores are the correct values to use for VA rating purposes. The examinations could be used in determining his disability rating during the relevant period on appeal, if and only if, the private examiner used Maryland CNC Word List. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code 6100. As such, the AOJ must contact the private audiologists for clarification of the word list used to evaluate the Veteran's speech discrimination ability. Jones (Michael) v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 382, 390 (2010) (holding that VA was required to seek clarification of a private examination report as to the type of word list testing conducted as this was "relevant, factual, and objective" information that appeared obtainable). 2. Entitlement to a TDIU due to service-connected bilateral hearing loss, to include on an extra-schedular basis pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b), is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the remanded increased rating claim. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991). Therefore, the matter must also be remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Clarify the type of word list used for speech recognition testing in the September 2008 VA clinic audiology consultation by any means possible to include contacting the audiology consultation for opinion regarding what word list would have been used in September 2008. 2. Contact the Premier Medical Audiology Department and request clarification as to the type of word list used to evaluate the Veteran's speech discrimination ability during his March 2016 examination. (continued on the next page) 3. Contact the Lutheran Medical Center and request clarification as to the type of word list used to evaluate the Veteran's speech discrimination ability during his July 2009 examination. T. MAINELLI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Adeleke, T. 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.