Hearing loss Board decisions

The Board has remanded four issues: bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, COPD, and adenoid cystic carcinoma. The Veteran's service treatment records indicate some respiratory symptoms during service, but the claims are being remanded for additional development including obtaining inpatient hospital records from Fort Jackson Army Hospital.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for specially adapted housing or a special home adaptation grant due to insufficient evidence of total disability.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for right ear hearing loss was reopened and granted. The appeal regarding the cervical spine condition was withdrawn by the Veteran prior to a Board decision.

The Veteran's claim for a higher disability rating for his bilateral hearing loss is remanded due to the need for a VA examination to assess the current severity of his condition.

The Veteran's left ear hearing loss is not compensable.,Service connection for a right leg disability, left leg disability, lower back disability, and right ankle disability are all denied.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that these conditions are linked to the appellant's noise exposure during his periods of active duty for training.

The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus as the Veteran did not serve in Vietnam and there was no evidence of herbicide exposure. The claim for TDIU is also remanded due to lack of information on employment status.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current conditions are likely due to his active service.

The Board has remanded the issues of service connection for tinnitus, left shoulder disability, left elbow disability, left and right knee disabilities, and bilateral hearing loss due to additional development.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for right ear hearing loss and found that new evidence supports a finding that it is related to noise exposure during military service. However, the Board also determined that the current hearing loss did not manifest during service and is not causally related to service.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding service connection for tinnitus and hearing loss. The Veteran's claims are not granted as there is no clear and unmistakable evidence of pre-service hearing loss or that his current hearing loss is related to service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted due to the reopening of his case and the evidence showing a current disability related to noise exposure during service.

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 in-service noise exposure.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was granted a 10 percent rating since May 27, 2016. Prior to that date, the condition did not warrant a compensable rating.

The Veteran's service connection claims for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are granted as the evidence is at least in equipoise regarding whether these conditions were caused by his in-service noise exposure.

The Veteran is granted a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities, with a combined rating of 90 percent.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his service-connected diabetes, and the Board has granted secondary service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for tinea pedis and bilateral hearing loss were denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a rating in excess of the current 10 percent or 20 percent ratings, respectively, for these conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection and rating increases, finding that his conditions did not warrant higher ratings based on the evidence of record.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's Substantive Appeal was not timely filed, and therefore, his appeal is denied.