Hearing loss decisions — 2021

The Veteran's appeals for service connection for right ear hearing loss and a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for DM have been dismissed due to the appellant withdrawing his appeals prior to the Board promulgating a decision.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for hearing loss disorder and left eye disorder, finding that there was no current diagnosis of these conditions.,There is no evidence to support a link between the Veteran's in-service experiences and his current hearing or eye conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that there was no evidence of a current disability meeting VA criteria and concluding that any potential hearing loss is not related to service.

The Veteran's hearing acuity was no worse than Level I for the right ear and Level VIII in the left ear prior to May 18, 2020. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his hearing acuity was not worse than Level IX in the right ear and Level XI in the left ear from May 18, 2020 to September 23, 2020. Therefore, an 80 percent rating is granted for bilateral hearing loss from May 18, 2020 to September 23, 2020.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for hearing loss, PTSD, and neck disability are denied. The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for PTSD prior to February 2, 2018 is remanded. The Veteran's claims for an increased rating for neck disability prior to August 21, 2020 and a compensable rating for GERD with hiatal hernia prior to August 21, 2020 are also remanded.

The Board has remanded the claims for initial compensable ratings for left ear hearing loss and to reopen a claim for service connection for bone loss of the skull due to new evidence showing worsening symptoms.

The Board has found that the Veteran's Alzheimer’s disease is not related to service and denied his claim.,The Board also found no evidence of bilateral hearing loss due to in-service noise exposure and denied his claim for this condition.,For the remaining conditions, including bilateral upper and lower diabetic neuropathy, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, psoriasis, kidney condition, coronary artery disease, Bell's Palsy, and prostate cancer, additional development is required as no medical nexus opinions have been provided.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for left ear hearing loss, finding that there is no evidence linking his current disability to military noise exposure. The Veteran was not diagnosed with hearing loss until almost three decades after separation from service.

The Veteran withdrew his claims for initial compensable ratings for bilateral hearing loss and loss of teeth, as well as a 10 percent evaluation based on multiple noncompensable service-connected disabilities before the Board could make a decision.

The Veteran's hypertension is granted as service-connected and aggravated by his diabetic nephropathy. The Veteran's appeal for an increased rating in excess of 70% for PTSD has been withdrawn. Issues related to a left thigh skin disability, PFB, bilateral hearing loss, CAD, right knee strain with instability, cortical cataracts, SMC based on loss of use, and TDIU prior to March 9, 2006 are all remanded.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities have rendered him unable to secure and maintain substantially gainful employment since May 31, 2017. The Board has granted a TDIU from that date onward but has remanded the issue of whether he was unemployable prior to May 31, 2017 for further review.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability likely began during his period of active duty service and is therefore granted as in-service.

The Board has remanded the claims of increased ratings for bilateral hearing loss and service connection for hypertension due to incomplete records and insufficient medical opinions.

The Board has decided that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, but has ordered a remand to consider additional medical evidence.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and initial disability ratings for post-concussive headaches and a left ankle sprain, finding that the Veteran's current hearing loss did not meet VA criteria for a disability. The Board also found no evidence of continuity of symptomatology or etiological link to service.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence regarding exposure to herbicide agents at Fort Chaffee, Arkansas. The Veteran's diabetes and peripheral neuropathy are presumed to be related to his military service.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate reasons and bases for denying service connection for bilateral hearing loss, specifically because the VA examiner did not consider the Veteran's lay statements regarding in-service noise exposure. The claim is now being remanded for further development.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability, insomnia disorder, and acid reflux due to lack of evidence showing a link between these conditions and the Veteran's active duty.,Service connection was not granted as there is no evidence that the current disabilities are related to service.

The Board has remanded the issue of service connection for bilateral hearing loss due to conflicting opinions and rationales in the August 2020 VA examination. The Veteran's current diagnoses are being reviewed to determine if they were incurred in service or caused by an in-service injury, event, or illness.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied as there is no evidence of a current disability for VA purposes.,The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for her lumbar spine disability is remanded due to the need for additional medical opinion regarding functional impairment and whether ankylosis exists.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for a skin disability is remanded as the examiner’s opinion was inadequate, requiring further consideration of the Veteran's lay statements.,The Veteran's claim for service connection for chronic fatigue is remanded due to the need for a more thoroughly reasoned opinion addressing whether her fatigue is caused by or aggravated by her service-connected conditions.