Hearing loss decisions — 2017

The Veteran's recurrent tinnitus is etiologically related to his military service, and the Board finds that the criteria for service connection have been met.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional medical examinations and development of his claims. Specifically, he needs a VA examination to assess whether his current hearing loss and right femur disability are related to service or other causes.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities meet the schedular requirement for a TDIU and are reasonably shown to render him unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation since October 16, 2012.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are service-connected, with the latter being secondary to his service-connected hearing loss.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to his military service, as evidenced by unprotected noise exposure during his 4 years in the military. As all three prongs of service connection are met, the claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted.

The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for bilateral hearing loss was denied as his initial claim was received on December 14, 2010.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The claim for service connection for bilateral tinnitus, to include as secondary to the now-service connected bilateral hearing loss, is remanded.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss was denied, and his request to reopen the previously denied lower back disability claim was not successful.

The Veteran requested to withdraw his appeal for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, and the Board has dismissed the appeal.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were denied in 1989. He filed a petition to reopen his claims on March 28, 2013, which was granted with an effective date of March 28, 2013. The claim for earlier effective dates is denied as there are no subsequent claims earlier than the March 28, 2013 petition to reopen.

The Board has ordered a remand due to the need for additional development and examination regarding the Veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

The Board found that the Veteran's right ear hearing loss is not related to his military service, as evidenced by an upward pure tone threshold shift documented during service. The claim for a low back disorder was remanded.

The Veteran's claims for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss and a rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus have been denied. The Veteran currently receives noncompensable ratings for both conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, with no other probable basis for these conditions. The claims are therefore granted.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for a Travel Board hearing.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus with a 10 percent rating, effective January 6, 2011. The claim for bilateral hearing loss is pending and will be addressed in the REMAND portion of this decision.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was rated at 80 percent since February 3, 2017.

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss disability is not related to his military service, as there was no significant threshold shift beyond normal measurement variability and no aggravation of preexisting hearing loss in the left ear. The Veteran did not have a hearing defect at entry into service.

The Board found that the Veteran's hearing acuity did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA's rating schedule, as his bilateral hearing loss was only rated at 0 percent disabling.

The Veteran developed right ear hearing loss and a reparative granuloma as a result of surgery performed by VA in December 2007. The Board finds that the criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 have been met.