Hearing loss decisions — 2021

The Board has remanded the case due to a need for further development, including consideration of whether an extra-schedular rating is warranted.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's conditions are at least as likely as not related to his military noise exposure.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are granted, as both conditions are found to be related to his military service.

The Board denied service connection for right ear hearing loss as there is no evidence of hearing loss for VA purposes in the Veteran's right ear.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is found to be a result of acoustic trauma sustained during active service, and the claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss has been rated as Level I in both ears, resulting in a noncompensable evaluation. The Board found that the evidence does not support an increase in rating.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of these conditions.,Service connection was also denied for lumbosacral strain as there is no evidence of an in-service injury or disease related to this condition.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was rated at 10 percent prior to September 3, 2020 and increased to 20 percent thereafter. The claim is being remanded for further evaluation.

The Veteran's appeal for a compensable rating for pseudofolliculitis barbae was withdrawn. The Board granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that the evidence supported the claim based on in-service noise exposure and continuity of symptomatology since service.

The Board has remanded the claims for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus due to new development required by a court order.

The Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are denied, while his claim for a higher initial disability rating for the gunshot wound to the back of head is granted with a 10% evaluation. His claim for a separate disability rating for the neck scar is also granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to his in-service hazardous noise exposure and grants service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a right knee disability, back disability, bilateral hearing loss with loss of balance, and hypertension have been denied as new and material evidence has not been received to reopen these claims.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claims for service connection for a back disability, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus. The conditions are deemed to be directly related to active service.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the schedular requirements for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU). The Board has referred the claim to VA’s Director of Compensation Service for extraschedular consideration.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to September 7, 2018 was denied as his hearing loss did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating. The claim for a rating in excess of 20 percent for bilateral hearing loss from September 7, 2018 was also denied as he met the criteria for a 20 percent rating.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is rated at 10 percent prior to December 18, 2018, and at 40 percent since then. The Board denied the appeal as there was no evidence of exceptional patterns or other factors that would warrant a higher rating.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for right ear hearing loss as he does not have a current disability of right ear hearing loss for VA purposes.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of service connection for headaches, right ear hearing loss, and bilateral knee disability due to inadequate VA opinions regarding the credibility and probative value of the Veteran's lay statements. Additional development is needed in each case.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed because he died during the pendency of his case, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of his claim.