Hearing loss decisions — 2007

The Board has decided to remand the case for additional development, including obtaining missing service medical records and arranging for a VA examination.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the veteran's claims for post-operative pilonidal cyst residuals, epidermatophytosis of the feet, hearing loss disability, sinusitis with allergic rhinitis, a psychophysiological nervous system reaction evidenced by hyperhidrosis, hives, and recurrent headaches, and an eye disorder to include open angle glaucoma. The RO has determined that new and material evidence was not presented for reopening claims for post-operative pilonidal cyst residuals and epidermatophytosis of the feet.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss does not warrant a compensable rating, and thus denied his claim for an initial compensable rating.

The Board denied the motion for revision of the June 2006 decision on grounds of clear and unmistakable error, concluding that there was no CUE in the decision.

The Board denied all service connection claims and increased rating claims, finding that the veteran did not meet the criteria for any of the conditions listed.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, and thus grants service connection for these conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss did not pre-exist service and was not aggravated by active duty, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case for further examination and opinions regarding service connection for hearing loss, including as due to noise exposure in service. The claim will be adjudicated again based on the new evidence.

The veteran withdrew his appeals for the issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and hepatitis C. The claim for pes planus was previously denied in November 1973 without new and material evidence being submitted.

The veteran's claims for service connection for chronic bilateral hearing loss disability, chronic tinnitus, and cold injury residuals of the hands and feet were denied as there is no evidence to support a direct relationship between these conditions and his military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is not related to his active service, and thus denied his claim for service connection.

The Board found that the veteran's hearing loss was not caused by military noise exposure and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding combat service and stressor verification, as well as for additional development of the hearing loss claim. The veteran's claims for PTSD and hearing loss will be reconsidered based on the new information.

The veteran's claim for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss from September 1, 2003 to September 29, 2004 was denied. His claim for a higher rating than 10 percent from September 30, 2004 was also denied on a schedular basis.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for defective vision, hearing loss, and a dental condition. The Board found no current evidence of these conditions and concluded that they were not incurred or aggravated by service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, right leg disability (claimed as residual of right ankle injury), and bipolar disorder. The evidence does not meet the criteria for a current disability or establish that these conditions are related to military service.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and right shoulder impingement syndrome, but denied any request for increased ratings. The veteran's initial noncompensable rating for hearing loss was maintained, while his initial 20 percent rating for the right shoulder remains in place.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed conditions, including depression, hearing loss, a rash of the groin area, and memory loss (claimed as memory block), were not incurred or aggravated during his active duty service. The evidence does not support a finding of continuity of symptomatology after service for any of these conditions.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for a Travel Board hearing and compliance with VCAA notice requirements.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims due to missing service medical records and a need for further development regarding his units of assignment during active duty in Korea.