Citation Nr: 23014289 Decision Date: 03/09/23 Archive Date: 03/09/23 DOCKET NO. 19-05 973 DATE: March 9, 2023 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1968 to March 1972, February 1991 to April 1991, September 2001 to September 2001, March 2003 to September 2003, October 2005 to February 2006, and April 2007 to February 2008. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2018 rating decision that granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Finally, the Board notes that additional VA-generated evidence was added to the record since the February 2019 statement of the case. However, the Board finds that it need not delay adjudication of the appeal to obtain a waiver or remand the appeal for AOJ review of this evidence because it is not pertinent to the bilateral ear hearing loss claim. 38 C.F.R. § 19.31. An initial compensable rating for bilateral ear hearing loss. After review of the record, a remand is required in this case to ensure that VA's responsibilities under the duty to assist are followed and that the Veteran is afforded every possible consideration. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. The Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to afford the Veteran with a contemporaneous VA examination so as to determine the current nature and severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. In this regard, the Veteran most recently underwent a VA examination in December 2018. However, since such time, recent evidence uploaded to the claims file tends to show that the Veteran reported increased and additional symptomatology regarding his bilateral hearing loss disability. In this regard, the Veteran argues entitlement to a 60 percent disability rating based on the problems that his hearing loss disability causes in his daily living. He asserts an inability to talk on the phone or understand what his wife and people are saying, to include in a group setting. In this regard, he reported that he always asks his wife to repeat what she just said. Further, he reported that he needs hearing aids but "they [do not] always help" and that in the summer his sinus problems would "make [his] hearing loss even worse." See 1/17/2019 NOD; see also 2/15/2019 Form 9. Therefore, as the above evidence suggests that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss symptomatology may have increased since the December 2018 VA examination, a remand is necessary in order to schedule him for an appropriate VA examination in order to assess the current nature and severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.327(a). This matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any and all of the Veteran's outstanding VA records from appropriate repositories. All records and/or responses received should be associated with the claims file. If any records cannot be obtained after reasonable efforts have been made, issue a formal determination that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain such records would be futile, which should be documented in the claims file. The Veteran must be notified of the attempts made and why further attempts would be futile and allowed the opportunity to provide the records. 2. After completion of step #1, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss disability. Conduct all necessary tests or explain why they could not be conducted. The examiner is to provide a full description of the disability and report all signs and symptoms necessary for evaluating the Veteran's disability under the rating criteria. Additionally, include any information concerning the functional impact of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss, to include as reported by the Veteran. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J.F., 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.