Tank in Korea

I came across a nice group of concise slides to share while researching Hensley v. Brown, 5  (1993).  But first, here is the definition of what is considered a current hearing disability.

 38 CFR 3.385 – Disability due to impaired hearing.

For the purposes of applying the laws administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent.

Link to Slides:  

HYPO: HEARING LOSS, Comedy of VA Errors Creates Lengthy Delays Answers and Advise

Excerpt from last slides:

• CAVC could not reverse decision of BVA and order VA to grant S/C because vet did not submit any medical evidence that linked his current hearing loss to service.

Advice to Advocates

• „ If vet had submitted positive linkage opinion after he submitted supportive lay evidence the Court may have been able to order VA to grant S/C.
• „ Of course, many vets do not have health insurance and are not able to pay for private medical opinion.

Two questions:

Have any ASKNOD readers written to the VA and received, copies of their audiograms and C & P audiograms–or examined them in person at the RO prior to making a decision to obtain a private medical opinion?

If a veteran needs to provide a private medical opinion for the VA to decide a hearing loss claim, shouldn’t the VA pay for it if the veterans do not have private health insurance?

Finally, this 2003 (#0304151) case was favorably decided by the BVA  veteran (an armored tank driver in Korea) whose records were destroyed in the St. Louis fire.  It gives a good overview of hearing loss issues and the information that  Judge John E. Ormond, Jr. considered in his decision.  It’s clear that the RO abused this veteran by making him appeal.