Citation Nr: 21009116 Decision Date: 02/19/21 Archive Date: 02/19/21 DOCKET NO. 19-11 243 DATE: February 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 90 percent for bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran meets the schedular criteria to be entitled to TDIU and his service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability has prevented him from securing and following substantially gainful employment. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to TDIU have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from April 1957 to April 1960. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from rating decisions in September 2017 and October 2018 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In February 2021, the Veteran and his spouse testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. 1. Entitlement to a TDIU is granted. TDIU may be assigned, where the schedular rating is less than total, when a veteran is unable to secure or follow substantially gainful occupation as a result of service-connected disabilities.  38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.16. In order to meet the schedular criteria for entitlement, a veteran must have either: (i) one disability rated at 60 percent or more; or (ii) two or more disabilities, with at least one disability rated at 40 percent or more and sufficient additional disability bringing the combined rating to at least 70 percent.  38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). Throughout this appeal, the Veteran has met the schedular criteria for TDIU. In a November 2018 private opinion, the Veteran’s treating physician opined that the Veteran’s hearing loss deteriorated to the point that he could no longer be employable based on a number of factors, to include his need for his wife to help him hear; his inability to participate in conversations; and his inability hear emergency vehicles while driving. The October 2019 VA hearing loss examiner opined that his service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus would prevent him from seeking or maintaining gainful physical or sedentary employment. While the Board notes that this examiner further opined that, considering the Veteran’s age, his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus would not be the “sole disabilities” to prevent him from seeking and maintaining gainful employment, advancing age may not be considered in making this determination. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.341, 4.19; Van Hoose v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 361, 363 (1993). Thus, the Board may (and will) not consider the effects of the Veteran’s age on his ability to maintain gainful employment. Based on the foregoing, the evidence reflects that the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability prevents him from securing and maintaining substantially gainful occupation, and TDIU is therefore warranted. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 90 percent for bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. During his October 2019 VA hearing loss examination, the Veteran reported that he underwent a cochlear implant surgery for the right ear in March 2019 at a private facility; he also receives treatment at an ear, nose, and throat clinic once a month to remove cerumen. Additionally, during his February 2021 virtual hearing, he testified that he had left ear cochlear implants four years prior through a private facility. As these records are not in the claim file, a remand is necessary to obtain them. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain, if possible, records of relevant private evaluations and treatment the Veteran has received for his service-connected hearing loss disability. The Veteran must assist in the matter by identifying his private healthcare providers and by submitting releases for VA to obtain any private records identified. 2. If upon completion of the above action the issue remains 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 T. Matta, 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.