Citation Nr: 21071441 Decision Date: 11/30/21 Archive Date: 11/30/21 DOCKET NO. 15-29 075 DATE: November 30, 2021 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an initial compensable evaluation for service-connected hearing loss disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1966 to July 1973. In November 2018, the Veteran testified under oath before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is of record. In April 2021, the issue on appeal was remanded for additional development. For the reasons outlined below, the Board finds that remand is again needed. Following the April 2021 Board remand, the Veteran was sent a subsequent development letter in April 2021. Later that month, a VA Form 27-0820 reports the following telephone contact: "The Veteran would like to drop any additional request that he may have with the VA. The Veteran would like t [sic] keep his hearing evaluation. Please take action. Thank you." It is unclear to the Board what is meant by these statements. The statement could be interpreted as a request to "the hearing evaluation" issue on appeal, as well as "keep his hearing evaluation" at the currently assigned disability rating. Adding to the ambiguity are follow up communications to the Veteran. In August 2021, VA sent the Veteran a letter informing him that it was discontinuing action on the issue of hearing loss, based on an April 2021 request. The letter informs the Veteran: If you did not intend to withdraw your claim for the condition(s)/issue(s) listed above, you have 30 days from the date of this letter to provide us with that information. If you notify us within 30 days, we will consider your claim filed as of the date that it was previously submitted. If you notify us after the 30 days has elapsed, you must resubmit your claim on the appropriate form, and your claim will be considered received as of the date of receipt of your complete claim. This letter suggests to the Board that the Veteran was informed his communication was being interpreted as a withdrawal of the issue and that he would need to take action in order to retract the withdrawal. No response was received from the Veteran within thirty days. However, thirty days later, in September 2021, a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) was issued. The SSOC informed the Veteran that: "On August 4, 2021 we sent you a duty to assist letter regarding the phone call and asked if you wished to withdraw your appeal. If so it would have to be done in writing. To date there has been no response to this request." This statement suggests to the Board that the Veteran's communication was not being accepted as a withdrawal and that he needed to take further action in order to withdraw the appeal. The appeal was returned to the Board in October 2021. The Veteran's representative submitted a brief in October 2021. The brief does not mention withdrawal. Given the above, the Board finds that it is ambiguous whether the appeal has been withdrawn. If the Veteran wishes to withdraw, a written withdrawal must be in writing and include: (1) the name of the Veteran; (2) the applicable VA file number; and (3) a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. If the appeal involves multiple issues, the withdrawal must specify that the appeal is withdrawn in its entirety or list the issues withdrawn from the appeal. 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.55(b)(1). Accordingly, the Board will proceed with the below. Entitlement to an initial compensable evaluation for service-connected hearing loss disability. The Board finds that additional development is needed prior to final adjudication of the issue on appeal. In the April 2021 remand, the Board found that there may be outstanding VA treatment records to be obtained and associated with the claim file. Specifically, statements made in a November 2019 VA treatment record suggest that puretone thresholds were measured; however, the decibel measurements are not included. The Board asked that the puretone thresholds in decibels be provided. If this information is not available, the Board asked that this be noted in the claim file. The Board acknowledges that VA treatment records were associated with the claim file following the April 2021 remand. However, the Board does not see that the information identified in the April 2021 remand was included. Again, the Board asks that this information be provided. The Board reiterates that if the information sought is not available, then this be noted in the claim file. In addition, in the April 2021 remand, the Board acknowledged that the Veteran submitted the results of a September 2018 private examination. This examination, as was noted at the November 2018 videoconference hearing, includes incorrect information, including the wrong first name for the Veteran. The Veteran submitted a corrected version, but the changes are handwritten, and it is unclear if the changes were made by the examiner. See Correspondence, October 2018. The private examination as now submitted is inadequate. As the Board is again remanding this matter, it reminds the Veteran that a copy with changes authorized by the examiner would be adequate. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. After securing any necessary consent forms from the Veteran, obtain any outstanding treatment records, to include any VA and/or private treatment records, pertaining to the issue on appeal. In particular, the Board asks that full results, including puretone threshold measurements in decibels, for the November 4, 2019 evaluation reported in the Veteran's VA treatment records, be obtained. If this information is not available, that should be noted in the claim file. In addition, the Board acknowledges that the Veteran submitted the results of a September 2018 private examination. This examination, as was noted at the November 2018 videoconference hearing, includes incorrect information, including the wrong first name for the Veteran. The Veteran submitted a corrected version, but the changes are handwritten, and it is unclear if the changes were made by the examiner. See Correspondence, October 2018. The private examination as now submitted is inadequate. As the Board is remanding, the Veteran should be advised that a copy with changes authorized by the examiner would be adequate. All efforts should be documented in the claim file. If any records could not be obtained, this should be noted in the claim file. 2. If upon completion of the above action the issue is denied, the case should be returned to the Board after compliance with appellate procedures. E. I. VELEZ Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Foster, 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.