Hearing loss decisions — 2014

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss has been denied as his disability level does not warrant a higher rating under the applicable VA rating criteria.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss is currently rated as noncompensable under the provisions of Diagnostic Code 6100. The VA examinations have consistently shown level I hearing acuity in both ears, which corresponds to a noncompensable rating.

The VA determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability, as manifested by Level VIII and Level III hearing acuity in each ear, warrants a 20 percent evaluation. The appeal is denied.

The Veteran's tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss are found to be related to his military service, with the Board granting service connection for both conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower and upper extremities, headaches, and a stomach disorder.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus due to procedural issues, and the Veteran is scheduled for a Travel Board hearing.

The Veteran's sinus disability, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus are all found to be related to service. The case is being remanded for additional development.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development. The issues of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, chronic lumbar strain, and right knee strain are currently under review.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss is found to likely preclude him from securing and following substantially gainful employment, given his educational level and previous work history.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was not incurred in or aggravated by service and denied his claim.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development due to incomplete examination reports and a need to reschedule examinations. The Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, pituitary tumor, and endocrine imbalance remain on appeal.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's in-service noise exposure likely caused his current condition. Service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is remanded due to insufficient evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his military service, and thus denied both claims.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and a back disorder. The case will be remanded for further action.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right ear hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his active service, while left ear hearing loss is not clearly and unmistakably due to natural progression. Service connection for these conditions is granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection are not properly adjudicated and requires additional development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding the etiology of his hearing loss, tinnitus, and carpal tunnel syndrome.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss disability is related to military service, and thus grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to service and grants service connection for this condition. The claim for bilateral hearing loss remains pending as further development is required.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his active service. The issue of bilateral hearing loss remains pending as it was not addressed in this decision.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to service, including in-service noise exposure. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.