Citation Nr: 21067922 Decision Date: 11/08/21 Archive Date: 11/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-33 591 DATE: November 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to April 9, 2018, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from May 1962 to July 1965. This matter is on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision. In May 2016, the Board remanded the claim for further development. In July 2019, the Veteran testified at a videoconference Board hearing before the undersigned. In November 2019, the Board stayed a claim of entitlement to service connection for ischemic heart disease and denied the Veteran's claim of entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to April 9, 2018. The Veteran appealed the November 2019 decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In September 2020, the Board denied entitlement to a rating higher than 20 percent from April 9, 2018 to January 27, 2020, and a rating higher than 30 percent since January 28, 2020, for the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss. In a September 2020 Order, the Court granted a September 2020 Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) that vacated and remanded that portion of the November 2019 Board decision that denied entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to April 9, 2018. In February 2021, the Board remanded the claim for the Agency of Original Jurisdiction to obtain a copy of August 2017 audiogram and an addendum regarding the nature and severity of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability prior to April 9, 2018, to include consideration of the August 2017 audiogram. Pursuant to the Board's remand, in May 2021 a copy of the August 2017 audiology note and audiogram was added to the record. In an August 2021 addendum a VA audiologist opined that the Veteran's hearing loss prior to 2018 was stable and consistent with the rating given. The audiologist considered the August 2017 note, but stated that "Actual puretones were not available." However, this is factually inaccurate since the record includes an August 2017 audiogram which shows puretone thresholds in graph form. Therefore, the Board must again remand this claim for an addendum regarding the level of severity of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss prior to April 9, 2018. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain an appropriate addendum from a VA examiner of appropriate expertise, other than the August 2021 VA audiologist, regarding the level of severity of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability prior to April 9, 2018. The claims file, including a copy of the September 2020 Joint Motion for Partial Remand, must be made available to the examiner for review who should indicate that the claims file was reviewed. The examiner should provide a retrospective medical opinion on the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss prior to April 9, 2018. That is, with consideration of the evidence of record, including the Veteran's lay statements, April 2016 testimony, and July 2016 substantive appeal, and his history, comment on the historical severity of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability prior to April 9, 2018. Please discuss the findings in an August 2017 VA audiology note which reflects difficulty understanding speech and audiological findings which indicated significantly worse hearing in the left ear, August 2017 VA audiogram (in graph form), and September 2017 otolaryngology report which recommended continued audiology follow-up for hearing aids. If this opinion cannot be provided, the examiner should clearly explain why this is so, including discussing whether the prior VA examinations and treatment records are accurate representations of the Veteran's disability level prior to April 9, 2018. The report of examination should include the complete rationale for all opinions expressed. KELLI A. KORDICH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Adams, 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.