## Facts

- Benny R. Roper, an Army veteran (Oct. 1967–Dec. 1970), was service-connected for bilateral hearing loss with recurrent tinnitus due to in-service acoustic trauma.
- The VA later granted service connection for depression as secondary to hearing loss; the RO assigned separate evaluations and combined them to an 80% rating under 38 C.F.R. § 4.25.
- Roper sought secondary service connection under 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a) for:
  - A right-knee disability from a 1976 workplace accident, alleging he could not hear warnings or an approaching truck due to hearing loss.
  - A left-leg disability from a 1991 accident involving a boat-trailer winch, alleging he could not hear mechanical sounds or a friend’s warnings due to hearing loss.
- In support, Roper submitted lay witness accounts about the accidents and a private physician’s opinion linking the accidents to his service-connected hearing loss.
- The RO denied the secondary claims; after a prior remand for development, the Board again denied secondary service connection and affirmed the 80% combined rating in a December 5, 2003 decision.

## Issues

1. Whether 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a)’s statement that a secondary condition “shall be considered a part of the original condition” bars VA from separately rating primary and secondary disabilities and combining them under 38 C.F.R. § 4.25.
2. Whether the evidence compelled a grant of secondary service connection for the right-knee and left-leg disabilities such that reversal, rather than remand, was warranted.

## Decision

- The court held that 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a) does not prohibit separate evaluations for primary and secondary conditions and combination under 38 C.F.R. § 4.25.
- The court affirmed the Board’s determination upholding the 80% combined rating for hearing loss and secondary depression.
- The court held the record did not justify reversal of the Board’s denial of secondary service connection for the right-knee and left-leg disabilities.
- The court vacated and remanded the secondary service-connection denials because the Board’s reasons-or-bases were inadequate, requiring readjudication.

## Legal Principles

- 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a)’s “part of the original condition” language addresses entitlement/relationship to a service-connected disability and does not prescribe a single unified rating for primary and secondary conditions.
- VA may assign separate schedular evaluations to causally related service-connected conditions and combine them under the combined ratings table in 38 C.F.R. § 4.25.
- Secondary service connection requires evidence that a disability is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310(a).
- The Board must provide an adequate statement of reasons or bases that permits understanding and judicial review, including when it discounts favorable medical opinions and relevant lay evidence. 38 U.S.C. § 7104(d)(1).
- Lay testimony regarding observable events and functional effects may be relevant to secondary causation and must be addressed for competency, credibility, and probative value.
- The Board must explain its application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule and why the evidence is not in approximate balance when denying a claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

## Conclusion

The court upheld VA’s practice of separately rating a primary disability and a secondary disability and combining the ratings under § 4.25, but required a remand where the Board denied secondary service connection without adequately explaining its treatment of favorable medical and lay evidence and the benefit-of-the-doubt standard.


Roper v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 173 (Vet. App. 2006)