Hearing loss decisions — 2017

The Veteran withdrew his appeals for the issues of entitlement to service connection for asbestosis, COPD, hypertension, and GERD at his hearing before the Board.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and finds that new and material evidence has been received. The Veteran's current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss is related to his in-service noise exposure.

The Board has reopened the Veteran's claim of service connection for back disability and found that new evidence supports a finding that his current back disability is related to an in-service injury. The Board also found no evidence linking his left ear hearing loss to service.

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss did not meet the criteria for service connection as there was no evidence of a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service, and the claim is denied.

The evidence does not show that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss or tinnitus is related to in-service loud noise exposure, and therefore service connection cannot be established.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue, floor of the mouth, and head and neck, lumbar spine disability, pain radiating into bilateral lower extremities, bilateral hearing loss, and bilateral tinnitus. The Board found that there was no evidence of herbicide exposure during service and insufficient medical evidence to establish a nexus between any current disabilities and service.

The Board has remanded the case due to scheduling issues and will schedule a hearing for the Veteran.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is as likely as not incurred in service, resolving all reasonable doubt in his favor. The claim for bilateral hearing loss remains denied.

The Board has granted service connection for PTSD, but the Veteran's claim for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. The TDIU claim remains pending and will be remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is etiologically related to his noise exposure in service, and therefore, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss was denied, and his TDIU claim was also denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating for hearing loss or entitlement to TDIU based on service-connected disabilities.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss for VA purposes, and therefore service connection for this condition is denied.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are being remanded due to the unavailability of his service treatment records, noise exposure during service, and the need for a new VA opinion.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to determine if his service-connected disabilities prevent him from securing and following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's hearing loss is rated at 10 percent prior to November 14, 2016 and in excess of 10 percent thereafter. The Board found that the evidence did not meet criteria for a higher rating.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for a VA examination.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss did not result from service, as there was no evidence of noise exposure during service and the onset of his hearing loss occurred decades after separation.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA medical records and a new hearing loss examination. The Veteran's claim will be readjudicated after these actions.

The Veteran's claim for an automobile or other conveyance and adaptive equipment, or for adaptive equipment only, is denied as he does not meet the criteria for 'permanent loss of use of one or both feet' within the context of 38 C.F.R. § 3.808.

The Board has determined that the VA examination and medical opinion provided did not substantially comply with the directives set forth by the June 2015 remand. The case is REMANDED for further development.