Citation Nr: 21015917 Decision Date: 03/18/21 Archive Date: 03/18/21 DOCKET NO. 18-01 923 DATE: March 18, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 40 percent prior to January 20, 2021, and a rating in excess of 90 percent thereafter for a bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating for individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1952 to June 1955. This case originally came before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The claim was last before the Board in June 2020. The Veteran did not request a hearing before the Board. See March 2018 VA Form 9. The Board notes further that the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is raised by the record and has been accordingly added to the present appeal. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453-54 (2009); Akles v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 118 (1991). 1. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 40 percent prior to January 20, 2021, and a rating in excess of 90 percent thereafter for a bilateral hearing loss disability is remanded. A remand by the Board confers on the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand orders. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). While substantial compliance is required, strict compliance is not. D’Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008) (citing Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999)). Most recently in June 2020, the Board remanded this issue in order to obtain July 2016 and January 2017 VA audiogram results. Unfortunately, although the January 2017 audiogram results were obtained and associated with the claims file, the July 2016 audiogram results were not. Additionally, since the June 2020 remand, the RO obtained updated VA treatment and among those records are March 2018 and July 2019 audiology records referring to audiograms that had been completed. The March 2018 audiogram results were provided in graphical form and the results can be reasonably interpreted by the Board. Kelly v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 471 (1995); Savage v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 259, 270 (2011). Nevertheless, no audiogram results from July 2019 in any form were provided and accordingly, a remand is required in order to obtain such. 2. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU was raised in the April 2016 Notice of Disagreement, April 2015 and January 2021 VA examination reports, and his spouse’s statement submitted January 2018. Additional development is necessary prior to adjudicating the claim on the merits, especially as it is unclear whether the Veteran is currently employed and, if not, when he was last employed. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Send the Veteran the appropriate notice as to how to substantiate a claim for a TDIU. Also provide him with a VA Form 21-8940, Veteran’s Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability, for completion, with instructions to return the form to the RO. 2. Ensure that all outstanding VA treatment records are associated with the claims file. Ensure that all numerical results from any additional audiograms are obtained and associated with the claims file. All attempts to obtain such, as well as any negative responses, should be included in the claims file. 3. Specifically, obtain the complete audiogram results referred to in the July 2016 and July 2019 VA audiology notes, and associate them with the claims file. The Board does not have access to the audiograms under “Tools” in the Veteran’s electronic claims file. 4. Thereafter, readjudicate the remanded claims on appeal. S. B. MAYS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Lee, 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.