Citation Nr: 21066155
Decision Date: 10/28/21	Archive Date: 10/28/21

DOCKET NO. 18-34 194
DATE: October 28, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to an evaluation for left ear hearing loss in excess of 0 percent is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1976 to April 1979.

This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a March 2017 rating decision of the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) regional office (RO). The Veteran testified at a hearing with the undersigned in May 2021.

Entitlement to an evaluation for left ear hearing loss in excess of 0 percent

In the May 2021 hearing, the Veteran asserted his service-connected left ear hearing loss has worsened. The Veteran submitted a VA-provided audiological evaluation. However, is unclear which speech recognition test was conducted because no test is checked on the form, to include the Maryland CNC test. Under such circumstances, VA may seek clarification. See Savage v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 259 (2011) (VA has a duty to return for clarification unclear or insufficient examination reports even when they do not originate from VA medical personnel, particularly with regards to private audiological examinations.)

 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Ask the VA audiologist who performed the June 1, 2021 examination and to provide a clarification of which Speech Recognition test was used. 

2. If, and only if, the Maryland CNC test was not conducted on June 1, 2021: schedule the Veteran for an examination by an audiologist to determine the current severity of his service-connected left ear hearing loss. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria.  

 

LAURA E. COLLINS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Brewer, 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.