Hearing loss Board decisions

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus are found to be related to his active service, while the respiratory disability claim is remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is not related to his military service and therefore denied his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's claim for payment or reimbursement of unauthorized private medical expenses incurred on October 28, 2007 is granted due to the presence of a service-connected disability and the emergency nature of the treatment.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection were denied. The RO provided the Veteran with multiple opportunities to submit evidence, but he failed to appear at scheduled VA examinations.

The Board has granted the Veteran's request for reconsideration and will remand the case to the RO for further development, including scheduling a VA audiology examination.

The Board has granted service connection for degenerative disk disease of the cervical spine, but denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The veteran's neck disability is considered to be directly related to his military service.

The Veteran's right ear hearing loss was evaluated as noncompensable, and no higher rating is warranted.

The Veteran's claim for higher initial ratings for bilateral hearing loss disability and recurrent tinnitus was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a schedular rating greater than the current assigned ratings.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is currently rated as 10 percent disabling from July 1, 2005 to May 3, 2009. The claim for an increased rating remains denied after this period.

The Board has ordered a VA examination to determine if the Veteran's left ear hearing loss is related to his military service, including any noise exposure. The case will be remanded for this purpose.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is not at a level of severity to warrant a compensable schedular evaluation, as he has manifested no worse than Level II hearing acuity in his right ear and Level IV hearing acuity in his left ear. Therefore, the claim for an increased rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss was denied.

The Board denied service connection for hypoglycemia, varicose veins, TMJ disability, and hearing loss. Service connection was granted for fibromyalgia, chronic sinusitis, chronic rhinitis, and arthritis of multiple joints.

The Board found that tinnitus was not incurred in or aggravated by service and denied the claim. For bilateral hearing loss disability, the Board noted a gap of 34 years between separation from service and the filing of the claim, which is more probative than the Veteran's statements regarding onset and continuity.

The Board found no evidence of hearing loss in service and denied the claim for service connection as there is not a link between current bilateral hearing loss and military service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected deviated septum and bilateral hearing loss do not warrant an initial compensable evaluation.

The Board denied service connection for hypertension, finding no evidence linking the condition to service. The Veteran's claim for bilateral hearing loss is pending and his claims for back spasm and residuals of cold weather injury, both feet have been withdrawn.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for right ear hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no current evidence of these conditions as defined by VA standards. The Veteran was not granted presumptive service connection due to lack of a qualifying exposure basis.

The Veteran's death was not caused by or aggravated by any service-connected disability. The Board denied both the cause of death and DIC claims.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus as there was no evidence of a current disability or any link to service. The Veteran's hearing was normal during his periods of active military service.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including a VA examination to determine the etiology of his claimed disabilities.