Citation Nr: 21021380 Decision Date: 04/12/21 Archive Date: 04/12/21 DOCKET NO. 18-28 581 DATE: April 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable evaluation for service-connected bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from October 1964 to October 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. This matter was previously before the Board via a virtual hearing in December 2020 before the undersigned Veteran’s Law Judge and was subsequently remanded for a contemporaneous VA ratable audiological examination to determine the current severity of the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability. A transcript of this hearing has been associated with the records. The matter has now been returned to the Board for readjudication. 1. Entitlement to an initial compensable evaluation for service-connected bilateral hearing loss is remanded. The Board notes that a significant difference is reflected in the Veteran’s decibel readings and bilateral hearing acuity between the February 2021 VA audiological examination and the Veteran’s private audiological examinations (June 2015 and November 2020) of record. In fact, the Veteran’s attorney contends that based on the November 2020 private audiological examination results, the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss should be rated at 10 percent, compared to the February 2021 VA audiological examination results which corresponds to a noncompensable rating. However, the Board also notes that both of the private audiological examinations referenced did not include a Maryland CNC Test which is required for rating purposes, and it would only be under an exceptional pattern threshold, pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 that the Veteran would be entitled to a compensable rating. Furthermore, the Board finds the raw data from the private audiological examinations challenging to evaluate. Additionally, the private testing results are significantly inconsistent with the decibel thresholds demonstrated on the VA examinations. Reconciling these inconsistent findings is beyond the Board’s purview. Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171, 175 (1991) (the Board is not competent to substitute its own opinion for that of a medical expert). Therefore, given the significant difference in the results of the private and VA audiological examinations, the board finds that a remand is necessary for a new VA audiological examination, which includes a reconciliation of the findings from the private audiological examinations and the February 2021 VA audiological examinations of record. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a new VA audiological examination, by an appropriately qualified examiner. Audiometric testing should be completed, and any bilateral hearing loss disability diagnosed pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. A Maryland CNC speech recognition test must be completed. The examiner must then do the following: Reconcile the conflicting audiological findings of record, to include: the June 2015 private audiological examination (resubmitted in November 2017), the November 2020 private audiological examination, and the February 2021 VA audiological examination. In this regard, the examiner must provide a thorough and well-reasoned rationale to explain the significant difference in the in the bilateral frequency findings, (decibel reading thresholds) and level of bilateral hearing acuity, between the VA audiological examination and the private audiological examinations. The Veteran is reminded that he must cooperate fully with the examiner at the time of the examination by providing the requested responses so that a consistent and reliable evaluation of his bilateral hearing loss claim can be obtained by the examiner. Please note that failing to cooperate in connection with the examination is the same as failing to report for the examination and may result in your claim being decided on the evidence of record without the benefit of the results of this examination. 38 C.F.R. § 3.655. 2. After completing the requested actions, and any additional action deemed warranted, the Agency of Jurisdiction should readjudicate the claim on appeal. Michael J. Skaltsounis Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J.B. King, 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.