The Board has found the AOJ's reliance on a VA examination citing an IOM article to be inadequate due to lack of rationale. The Veteran's hearing loss had delayed onset, but the VA examiner did not provide sufficient explanation for this conclusion based on McCray v. Wilkie. Therefore, further medical development is needed.
The deciding factor: The Board found the AOJ's reliance on a study by the IOM article to be inadequate due to lack of rationale and conflicting findings in McCray v. Wilkie.
- Claimed conditions
- bilateral hearing loss
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- November 14, 2024
- Citation
- A24074726
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 1,081 · Granted: 38% (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 A24074726.
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.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeal for service connection of bilateral hearing loss and a ruptured right ear drum was dismissed due to the death of the Veteran.
- Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was noted upon entry into active duty service and did not increase in severity during service. Therefore, it denied his claim for service connection.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral hearing loss, migraine headaches, and PTSD due to additional development of records and examination.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss claim, specifically needing an addendum opinion from a VA examiner. The Veteran will be asked to provide any missing records and former employers' information.
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.