BVA Case 21-5427: Psychiatric

Real Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · November 9,2022 · PIETSCH, Judge

Outcome
Unknown
Decision Date
November 9,2022
Judge
PIETSCH, Judge
Service Era
Not specified

Conditions Claimed

PsychiatricBackCervicalHearing_LossTinnitusTdiuEye

Issues on Appeal

Back ConditionService ConnectionReopenTdiuIncreased RatingHearing Loss

Why It Was Decided This Way

The veteran appealed to the Board,and in a March 2006 decision,the Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

In a December 2009 rating decision,the RO declined to reopen the claim, determining that the evidence was not new and material.

The examiner opined that the veteran's right ear hearing loss and tinnitus were at least as likely as not related to service.

But the examiner opined that the veteran's left ear hearing loss was not related to service because his left ear tested normal at separation from service and was not aggravated in service.

In a May 2017 VA medical opinion on secondary service connection, the examiner opined that the veteran's vertigo was less likely than not related to right or left ear hearing loss.

March 2021 Board Remand In March 2021,the Board noted that though the RO had substantially complied with its January 2019 remand order, remand was warranted for a new examination to determine the severity of the veteran's right ear hearing loss and the cause of his left ear hearing loss.

The Board advised the veteran that though VA has a duty to assist in helping him substantiate his claims,that duty is not a one-way street and it was important that he comply with audiological testing.

July 2021 Board Decision In the July 2021 decision on appeal,the Board denied service connection for left ear hearing loss,finding that though the veteran consistently expressed his belief that his hearing loss is related to his exposure to noise in the motor pool during military service,he did not have the medical training or credentials to relate his hearing loss to active service.

Authorities Cited

Ardison v. BrownAries v. PeakeBarr v. NicholsonCoker v. PeakeDavis v. WestDoucette v. ShulkinFrankel v. DerwinskiGilbert v. DerwinskiJohnston v. BrownLendenmann v. PrincipiMonzingo v. ShinsekiPerez v. DerwinskiRay v. WilkieRomanowsky v. ShinsekiSee Coker v. NicholsonSee Hilkert v. WestSee Locklear v. NicholsonSee Ortiz v. PrincipiSee Smallwood v. BrownStefl v. NicholsonVan Valkenburg v. ShinsekiWood v. Derwinski

Denial Type

Credibility|No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Not New Material|Preponderance Against|Duty To Assist|Inadequate Exam

Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim

VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.

Run my claim through VetAid →