Citation Nr: 21042637 Decision Date: 07/13/21 Archive Date: 07/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-43 878 DATE: July 13, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service in the U.S. Marine Corps from June 2007 to June 2011. In July 2019, the Board remanded the issues of entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss and entitlement to an initial compensable rating for right ear hearing loss for development. During development, a March 2020 rating decision granted entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss and assigned noncompensable ratings for each ear. As such, the appeal has since been recharacterized as a claim for entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. Review of the record reveals that a remand is required in order to provide a new VA audiological examination. To that end, the Board notes that the Veteran's most recent and pertinent VA audiological examination took place in December 2019, which established service-connection for left ear hearing loss and resulted in a noncompensable rating for bilateral hearing loss. However, the examiner stated that "Threshold responses were not repeatable, thus, results are unreliable and invalid. Positive Stenger tests 1000-4000 Hz. Bone conduction scores were below air conduction scores, consistent with invalid responses. Masking for bone conduction was not completed when results were clearly inaccurate or invalid." In June 2021, the Veteran and his representative indicated that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability had worsened since his most recent and pertinent VA examination. Additionally, it was requested that the Veteran should be provided an opportunity to report for a new VA examination to ascertain the current severity and of his bilateral hearing loss. See Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121 (1991) (VA has a duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous examination of the Veteran in an increased rating claim); Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991); see also Snuffer v. Gober, 10 Vet. App. 400, 403 (1997) (a Veteran is entitled to a new examination after a two-year period between the last VA examination and the Veteran's contention that the pertinent disability had increased in severity). Given the above, a contemporaneous VA audiological examination is thereby warranted. Finally, there may be outstanding or pertinent treatments available for review. The Board finds that it would be prudent for an attempt to obtain any outstanding treatment records be made. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. With the assistance of the Veteran as necessary, identify and obtain any outstanding, relevant treatment records, and associate them with the Veteran's electronic claims file. If the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) cannot locate or obtain such records, it must specifically document the attempts that were made to locate or obtain them, and explain in writing why further attempts to locate or obtain any government records would be futile. The AOJ must then: (a) notify the claimant of the specific records that it is unable to obtain; (b) explain the efforts VA has made to obtain that evidence; and (c) describe any further action it will take with respect to the claim. All attempts to obtain records should be documented in the Veteran's electronic claims file. 2. Then, after pertinent records are obtained, but whether or not records are obtained, schedule the Veteran for a new VA audiological examination to assess the current severity of his bilateral hearing loss disability. The audiologist is to be provided access to the Veteran's electronic claims file and must specify in the report that these records have been reviewed. The evaluation should be in accordance with the criteria delineated in 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 and should include testing of pure tone criteria at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz and speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test. The VA audiologist must fully describe the functional effects caused by the bilateral hearing loss disability in the final report. 3. After the development requested has been completed, the AOJ should review any report to ensure that it is in complete compliance with the directives of this remand. If the report is deficient in any manner, the AOJ must implement corrective procedures at once. MICHAEL D. LYON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Miller, 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.