Hearing loss decisions — 2008

The VA has denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss, currently rated at 50 percent.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence of a nexus to service. The claim for reopening the hearing loss was granted due to new and material evidence.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence of continuity of symptoms or a medical nexus to service.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development, including scheduling a VA examination to determine if his hearing loss and tinnitus are related to military service.

The Board has ordered a VA hearing examination to determine if the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is related to service exposure. The appeal will be remanded for further development.

The VA determined that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is not related to his service, as evidenced by his normal hearing at separation and no evidence of in-service noise exposure.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss did not begin during service or due to a disease or injury incurred in service. The claim for service connection is denied.

The Board found no current diagnosis of PTSD and denied the veteran's claim for service connection. The issues of right ear hearing loss, right knee disorder, and left knee disorder were also addressed but are remanded due to lack of proper notice and potential need for additional evidence.

The veteran's claim of service connection for tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, and PTSD was denied as there is no medical evidence to show a current diagnosis of these conditions.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. However, the preponderance of the medical evidence does not show a current disability as defined by VA regulations.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that new and material evidence was not received to reopen the previously denied claim for bilateral hearing loss. The Board also found insufficient evidence linking current tinnitus to service.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for a compensable initial rating for bilateral hearing loss and service connection for lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, finding no evidence of these conditions in service or due to herbicide exposure.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there is no medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim for service connection for hearing loss. The veteran's current hearing loss is being evaluated further by an otolaryngologist.

The Board has determined that a new VA examination is necessary to determine if the veteran currently has right ear hearing loss as defined by VA regulation. The case will be remanded for this purpose.

The Board has remanded the case due to scheduling issues and the submission of additional evidence. The veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus will be reconsidered.

The veteran does not meet the basic eligibility requirements for assistance in acquiring specially adaptive housing or a special home adaptation grant due to his service-connected disabilities.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is not related to service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected disabilities are of such severity as to prevent him from obtaining and retaining substantially gainful employment, warranting a TDIU.

The Board has remanded the veteran's claims for service connection due to additional analysis and possible medical evidence being necessary. The case will be returned to the Board after further consideration.