Hearing loss decisions — 2002

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for bilateral hearing loss is being remanded due to the failure to appear at a scheduled hearing. The veteran wishes to have another hearing before a member of the Board.

The VA has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss warrants a 10 percent disability rating, which is the maximum schedular evaluation available. The RO found no exceptional or unusual factors to warrant an extraschedular rating.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for an initial compensable disability evaluation for his hearing loss of the left ear, finding that it did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, psychiatric disorder, low back disorder, chondromalacia of the right knee, left shoulder disability, and headaches have all been denied. The evidence submitted since the last final denial does not provide new or material evidence to reopen any of these claims.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that there was no evidence of hearing loss during active service and that current hearing loss is not related to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability, finding no current manifestation of such a disability.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that his current hearing loss did not begin during or as a result of his military service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for hearing loss, hemorrhoids, and gum disease. The evidence did not provide new and material information to reopen the claim for hearing loss. There is no medical evidence linking the current conditions to service or any other relevant exposure basis.

The Board denied an effective date prior to October 31, 1996 for a 10 percent evaluation for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for the cause of his death, finding no evidence linking his death to his period of recognized guerrilla service or any service-connected disability.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence of current disabilities or a link to service.

The Board found that the veteran does not currently have a chronic fungal infection of either ear and denied service connection for bilateral fungal ear infections. The Board also found that the veteran's hearing loss is causally related to his service, warranting service connection.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and a right knee disorder, finding that there is no clear evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The veteran has withdrawn his appeal, and the case is dismissed without prejudice.

The Board has granted a 20 percent evaluation for the veteran's residuals of a fracture of the left shoulder since September 19, 2000. The noncompensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss remains unchanged.

The Board found that the veteran does not have a bilateral hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for a compensable evaluation for his bilateral hearing loss and the propriety of an initial 10 percent rating for his tinnitus.

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for left ear hearing loss is denied as the evidence does not show he is totally deaf in his non-service-connected right ear, which would allow for a higher rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have any of the claimed conditions and finds no evidence to support service connection for any of them.

The Board has determined that the creation of the overpayment was due to administrative failure and not fraud, misrepresentation or bad faith. The veteran's claim for continued increased compensation rates and his daughter's Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) were submitted under the same cover letter in September 1995, putting VA on notice of both benefits sought. As a result, recovery of the overpayment is against equity and good conscience.