Citation Nr: 21023311 Decision Date: 04/20/21 Archive Date: 04/20/21 DOCKET NO. 13-27 612 DATE: April 20, 2021 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 1981 to November 1981; from September 2002 to February 2003; from October 2006 to April 2008; and from July 2009 to September 2010. This appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) arose from a June 2011 rating decision in which the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) granted service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and assigned an initial zero percent (noncompensable) rating effective September 6, 2010. The Board notes that after a lengthy procedural history, the Veteran testified in April 2015 before a Veterans Law Judge at a live hearing; a transcript is of record. This hearing was before a now-retired judge. In a January 2021 correspondence, the Veteran was given the opportunity to request another hearing. The Veteran did not respond within the allotted 30 days; thus, the Board may proceed with adjudication of this appeal. This appeal was before the Board in 2015 and 2018. The Board remanded each time in order to obtain clarification of the type of word test used by Centro Audiologico Del Este for the Veteran’s hearing examination. Unfortunately, the Board finds that the RO failed to comply with the remand instructions provided in the remand directives in the 2018 Board Remand; thus, further action on the claim on appeal is warranted, even though such will, regrettably, further delay an appellate decision on this matter. A remand by the Board confers upon the Veteran, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Board notes the RO did contact Centro Audiologico Del Este twice in May 2020; however, the RO requested “all treatment records, hospital summaries, findings and/or diagnoses.” Clarification of the type of word list used was not specified in the RO’s request. The RO further failed to comply with remand directives instructing any further development, such as an audiology examination, if necessary. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact Centro Audiologico Del Este and specifically ask if they used Maryland CNC word list for the Veteran’s speech discrimination examinations, and if not, request the name or type of word list was used to evaluate the Veteran’s speech discrimination ability during his examinations in August 2012, July 2015, and June 2020. Document any attempts to obtain this information in the claims file. If this information is not obtained, document the efforts taken to obtain it, and describe any further action taken. 2. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the current severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. The examiner should provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran’s disability under the rating criteria. T.D. JONES Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Townsend, 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.