Hearing loss Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including hearing loss and PTSD, render him unable to obtain or maintain substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's tinnitus is found to have been incurred in service, and the claim for hearing loss is dismissed as the Veteran withdrew his appeal.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and records.

The Veteran's claim to reopen service connection for left ear hearing loss is being REMANDED due to the need for a VA medical opinion regarding the relationship between current left ear hearing loss and noise exposure in service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and providing a VA examination to assess the severity of the Veteran's service-connected hearing loss and tinnitus. The claim will be readjudicated after all actions are taken.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus due to outstanding VA medical records, an addendum to a November 2009 VA audiology examination report, and further development of the issues.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for Systemic Lupus Erythematosus, Bilateral Hearing Loss, and Back Condition. The decision was based on new evidence submitted by the Veteran that reopened his previously denied claims.

The Board found that the Veteran's preexisting left ear hearing loss was not aggravated by his military service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, including noise exposure during active duty. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus were not manifest in service or to a degree of 10 percent within one year of separation, and are unrelated to service. Therefore, the claims for service connection have been denied.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss has been rated at 10 percent since July 19, 2010. The VA determined that the Veteran's current level of hearing acuity warrants this rating.

The Board has remanded the case due to outstanding VA treatment records and the need for a new VA examination to assess the current nature, extent, and severity of the Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, including exposure to noise from firearms and explosions. As a result, the claims for service connection have been granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current hearing loss disability or tinnitus related to his military service, and thus denied both claims for service connection.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional evidence and for a VA audiological examination. The case will be readjudicated based on all received evidence.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is likely the result of his active service, and the Board grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to his active service, but his acquired psychiatric disorder (to include PTSD) is not. The claim for an acquired psychiatric disorder to include PTSD is denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are as likely as not to have had their onset in service or are otherwise casually related to active service, thus granting service connection for both conditions.

The Veteran's tinnitus is granted as service connected. The Board finds the evidence in relative equipoise with regard to whether his bilateral hearing loss and skin cancer are related to service, but remands for further development regarding occupational exposure.

The Veteran's appeal was dismissed due to his death, and the Board has no jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of this appeal.