Citation Nr: 18144070
Decision Date: 10/23/18	Archive Date: 10/23/18

DOCKET NO. 16-27 837
DATE:	October 23, 2018
ORDER
Service connection for a neck disability is denied.
FINDING OF FACT
The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that a neck disability began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for service connection for a neck disability are not met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran had active service in the U.S. Navy from September 1963 to September 1965.  This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2014 rating decision.
Service connection for a neck disability
The Board concludes that, while the Veteran has diagnoses of cervical spondylosis with degenerative changes, the preponderance of the evidence is against finding that they began during active service, or are otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a), (d).
The Veteran has claimed service connection for a neck disability but has not provided any statement or description of a relevant in-service event, injury or disease.  His service treatment records show treatment for various symptoms and conditions, but there no records or entries pertaining to the neck or cervical spine.  His September 1963 enlistment examination and August 1965 separation examination were normal, and there is no indication of a chronic neck disability within one year of his discharge.  Without evidence of an in-service event related to the neck, service connection is not warranted.
In May 2015, the Veteran reported that he had moved and did not receive notice of a scheduled examination.  However, his file shows that he was only scheduled for an examination for a hearing loss claim.  He was not scheduled for a VA examination for his neck, and for the reasons discussed above, an examination is not necessary.  Bardwell v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 36 (2010) (VA is not required to provide a medical examination when there is no credible evidence of an event, injury, or disease in service).
The appeal is accordingly denied.  In making this determination, the Board has considered the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) regarding benefit of the doubt, 
 
but there is not such a state of equipoise of positive and negative evidence to otherwise grant the Veteran’s claim.
 
M. TENNER
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Shamil Patel, Counsel