Hearing loss decisions — 2010

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA medical records and verifying his periods of active duty training (ACDUTRA).

The Veteran's service connection claims for chronic osteomyelitis of the left lower leg, cellulitis of the left lower leg, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and a chronic disability as a result of heat stroke have been granted. The claim for chronic sinusitis was also granted.

The Veteran's appeals for increased ratings for Major Depressive Disorder, tinnitus, and asbestosis have been withdrawn. The appeal regarding TDIU was also dismissed. Asbestos exposure is not considered a factor in the Veteran's respiratory symptoms or hearing loss.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for examinations.

The Veteran's claims for service connection have been reopened and are granted. Service connection is established for right ear hearing loss, but not for the other conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not service-connected, as there is no competent medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss was denied, and the claim for service connection for colon cancer was also denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support an increased disability rating for hearing loss or service connection for colon cancer.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for eye disability, bilateral hearing loss, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus due to a lack of evidence showing in-service occurrence or aggravation.

The Board has remanded the case for a videoconference hearing at the local RO.

The Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is found to be related to exposure to acoustic trauma during service, and the Board has granted service connection for this disability.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus is granted, with the Board finding that his tinnitus is as likely due to military noise exposure or associated with his service-connected bilateral hearing loss.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development and consideration of his claims, including a VA examination to reassess the severity of his bilateral pes planus with arthritic changes and a medical nexus opinion concerning the etiology of his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus.

The Board has denied the Veteran's application to reopen his claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability, finding that no new and material evidence was received since the last final denial in June 2005.

The Veteran's claim for increased ratings for bilateral hearing loss was denied. Prior to May 24, 2010, the Veteran did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating. Since May 24, 2010, he has been rated at 10 percent.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is related to his in-service noise exposure and grants his claim for service connection.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional treatment records and a VA examination.

The Board finds that the preponderance of the competent medical and other evidence does not support a finding that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss disability was incurred in or otherwise the result of his active service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain VA medical records and to provide the Veteran with a VA audiological examination to determine if his current hearing loss and tinnitus are related to military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus disabilities are related to noise exposure during service, and thus grants service connection for these conditions.

The Board found that the Veteran's hearing loss disability was not incurred in or aggravated by service and is unrelated to his military noise exposure. As a result, the claim for service connection was denied.