The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient explanation of VA's duty to assist and for obtaining private treatment records from Palm Bay Hospital. The Veteran also contends that a higher rating is warranted on an extraschedular basis, and a new examination is needed.
The deciding factor: The decision was remanded because the Board failed to adequately explain whether all necessary development had been completed, particularly regarding the availability of private treatment records from Palm Bay Hospital.
- Claimed conditions
- Bilateral Hearing Loss
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- June 17, 2019
- Citation
- 19147136
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 3,038 · Granted: 30% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 19147136.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is granted as service-connected. The claims for alcohol abuse and psychiatric disorder are remanded for additional development, including a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of these conditions.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to a need for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss. The issue remains under direct service connection theory.
- Denied
The Veteran's hearing loss was rated at 30 percent, the highest non-compensable rating available. The Board found that his hearing loss did not warrant a higher rating based on VA examinations and medical records.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that there was no evidence of a nexus between his current hearing loss and his active service. The Board noted that while he had complaints of earaches in service, these did not indicate a current disability.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.