Hearing loss decisions — 2016

The Board denied service connection for right ear hearing loss and found that a compensable rating for left ear hearing loss is not warranted.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD and right foot onychomycosis, have rendered him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation. His TDIU claim is granted.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have a current bilateral ear disorder other than hearing loss, and thus denied service connection for a bilateral ear disorder. The claim of entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss was also denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss are service-connected, with no specific rating assigned or effective date provided.

The Board has ordered a remand to obtain additional medical records and provide the Veteran with an examination to determine if his current bilateral hearing loss is related to service, including noise exposure.

The Veteran's initial claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss was granted, with a disability rating of 10 percent prior to January 11, 2016, and 30 percent thereafter. The current effective date is not specified.

The Veteran's PTSD was granted a rating of 50 percent, but his seizure disorder and left ear hearing loss were denied.

The Veteran is unable to engage in a substantially gainful occupation due to his service-connected bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, which prevent him from engaging in his prior work as a lineman.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss has been evaluated as 10 percent disabling prior to June 4, 2014 and 20 percent thereafter. The Board finds that the evidence does not support an evaluation in excess of these ratings.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to inadequate medical opinions and the need for additional examinations.

The Veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection as his current bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and vertigo (Meniere's disease) are not shown to be related to his military service.

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

The Veteran's appeal for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss has been withdrawn, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD effective October 6, 2010, based on liberalizing law that became effective July 13, 2010. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his military service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hearing loss was denied as there is no evidence of a current disability.,Service connection for pes planus was denied because the mild pes planus noted at entry did not worsen during active service.

The Board has granted service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current disabilities are at least as likely as not related to his active duty service. The claim for residuals of malaria is remanded due to lack of medical evidence.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is currently rated as noncompensable, with no evidence of exceptional patterns warranting higher ratings. The claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder remains pending.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unemployable, as he has maintained employment throughout the appeal period and his PTSD does not prevent him from performing work that is not heavily reliant on interpersonal interactions.

The Board has granted service connection for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus due to exposure to Agent Orange during service. The Veteran's conditions are presumed to be related to his military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is related to his in-service noise exposure, and service connection for this condition is granted. For COPD, the Board finds additional development is needed as the VA examination was not conducted by a pulmonary specialist and further clarification on the relationship between the lung disorder and service is required.