BVA Case 17-3373: Back

The Board found that service connection was not warranted because the appellant did not exhibit a bilateral hearing loss disability for VA purposes.

The Court found that the Board erred in its reasons-or-bases by not discussing the May 2006 private medical treatment record and that it was prejudicial because the absence of objective results from the May 2006 audiometry tests did not enable the Court to review the matter.

The Board found that service connection was not warranted because the appellant did not exhibit bilateral hearing loss for VA compensation purposes either in service or since separation from service.

In doing so, the Board noted that a May 2006 private treatment record stated that audiometry testing had been completed but did not state decibel levels of hearing loss and,therefore,the report did not serve to substantiate the claim.

The parties agreed that remand was warranted because the Board failed to ensure that the duty to assist had been satisfied concerning the May 2006 private audiogram results under Savage ,24 Vet.

The Board denied the claim because the appellant did not exhibit a hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes and concluded that [a]bsent a showing of current disability,service connection is not [warranted].

Once the Secretary undertakes the effort to provide an examination when developing a service-connection claim,even if not statutorily obligated to do so,he must provide an adequate one.

Whether a medical opinion is adequate 3 is a finding of fact,which this Court reviews under the 'clearly erroneous'standard.