Hearing loss Board decisions

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination.

The Veteran's claim for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss prior to March 6, 2012 and in excess of 20 percent thereafter is being remanded due to the need for a VA audiological examination.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for increased ratings for PTSD, Lumbar Spine Disorder, hearing loss in his left ear, and CAD. The Veteran's service-connected conditions were found to be adequately addressed by the current schedular evaluations.

The Veteran's tinnitus is at least as likely as not related to his active service, and the Board finds that he has a current disability of tinnitus. The Veteran also testified about hearing loss in 1992, but VA treatment records from this period are missing. Therefore, additional development including obtaining relevant VA treatment records and scheduling a VA examination for PTSD is needed before deciding these claims.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are found to be related to noise exposure during his military service, leading to a grant of service connection for both conditions.

The Veteran's left ear hearing loss does not warrant a compensable evaluation as his auditory thresholds and speech discrimination results do not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA regulations.

The Veteran's asthma is found to have had its onset during her active duty, and the Board grants service connection for this condition.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus and found that the Veteran's current tinnitus is related to his in-service exposure to loud noise. The initial disability rating for PTSD remains at 30 percent.

The Board finds that the Veteran's bilateral foot disability is related to his active service, while his bilateral hearing loss disability is not.

The Board has remanded the case due to inadequate examination and further development is required.

The Board found that the Veteran's current bilateral sensorineural hearing loss disability did not meet the criteria for service connection as there was no in-service incurrence or continuity of symptomatology, and thus denied the claim.

The Veteran's recurrent tinnitus was found to be incurred in active service. The Board granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's appeal for an initial compensable rating for his service-connected hearing loss was dismissed due to the death of the claimant during the pendency of the appeal.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining audiometric test results from specific VA audiological evaluations. The Veteran's claim of entitlement to an initial evaluation for bilateral hearing loss disability is pending.

The Board finds that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability was incurred in service, and grants service connection for this condition.

The Board found that the Veteran does not have a current bilateral hearing loss disability for VA purposes and denied his claim of service connection.

The Veteran's appeal involves multiple issues related to his service-connected conditions, including ratings for various disabilities and the effective dates of service connection. The case is being remanded due to a need for a Board hearing.

The Veteran seeks VA compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. � 1151 for additional disability resulting from faulty VA treatment in January 2001, July 2006, and/or November 2006. The case is REMANDED to obtain additional medical records and conduct a VA examination.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his military service and granted service connection for this condition. The decision on bilateral hearing loss will be remanded as it requires additional development.