Hearing loss Board decisions

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of his VA and private treatment records, including audiograms from the University of Alabama Medical Center (Kirklin Clinic).

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional development of his claims, including obtaining private treatment records from Georgia Regents Medical Center.

The Veteran's service connection claim for bilateral tinnitus was granted. The remaining issues are addressed in the REMAND portion of this decision.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for a new VA examination to assess the current severity of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. The issue remains whether he should receive an initial compensable rating.

The Board finds that the Veteran's currently diagnosed bilateral hearing loss is related to noise exposure in service and grants service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's claim for an increased rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss was denied as he failed to report for a scheduled VA examination without good cause.

The Veteran's TDIU claim for the period prior to February 3, 2006 is denied as there is no evidence that his service-connected disabilities rendered him unemployable during this time.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining VA Vocational Rehabilitation records and an addendum opinion from the April 2016 VA examiner regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss disability, and his claims for service connection for bilateral knee disorder and mild degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine are denied as there is no evidence of in-service injury or chronic condition. The examiner found no link between any current conditions and service.

The Veteran requested an earlier effective date for a 20 percent evaluation for bilateral hearing loss. The Board found that the earliest date of entitlement was March 15, 2010, when VA granted a 20 percent rating based on a July 2010 VA examination. No earlier effective date is warranted as there were no findings prior to March 15, 2010, that would warrant such a rating.

The Veteran's request for hearings has been addressed, and the case is being remanded due to scheduling issues. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus remains on appeal.

The Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss was not incurred during or as a result of in-service noise exposure. The Board found the evidence insufficient to establish service connection.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are found to be related to in-service acoustic trauma.,The Veteran's PTSD is found to be related to his fear of hostile military or terrorist activity during service.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss did not warrant a compensable rating at any point during the appeal period, and thus denied his claim for an increased rating.

The Veteran's bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is currently rated at 10 percent, effective October 10, 2013. The Board finds that the evidence does not support a higher rating for any period of time.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to properly adjudicate the Veteran's claims for service connection, including obtaining additional medical records and verifying his reported stressors.

The Board has determined that a new VA examination is needed to determine the etiology of any current bilateral hearing loss and whether it was caused or aggravated by service-connected otitis media. The Veteran's claim will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied as there is no evidence of a current disability related to in-service noise exposure.

The Board has ordered additional development due to the need for a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability. The case is being returned to the AOJ for further consideration.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining a VA examination and medical opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's left ear hearing loss.