Hearing loss Board decisions

The veteran's claim of entitlement to separate 10 percent ratings for bilateral tinnitus has been denied. The case is being remanded for further action.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss disability is not attributable to service and denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's claims for increased ratings for left wrist arthritis and bilateral hearing loss are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records, scheduling a VA examination, and providing VCAA notice.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss does not meet the criteria for a compensable disability rating.

The veteran's claims for service connection for chronic bilateral hearing loss disability and chronic tinnitus are being remanded due to the need for a VA examination.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for scheduling a Travel Board hearing and further development.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is related to military service. The RO must arrange for a VA examination and obtain additional information from the veteran.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current hearing loss disability or tinnitus, and thus service connection is denied for these conditions.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to service, and thus denied both claims.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss does not warrant a compensable disability rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, granting service connection for these conditions.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the veteran's claims for service connection for hearing loss disability and tinnitus. The VA audiological examination in November 2003 linked the veteran's current hearing loss disability and tinnitus to his military service due to noise exposure.

The Board has determined that the veteran's current right ear disorder(s) did not have its onset during service or for many years thereafter and is not related to his service, thus denying his claim of entitlement to service connection.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss as secondary to the veteran's service-connected shell fragment wounds to the left foot and ankle. The right hip disability is also found to be related to the service-connected condition.

The veteran's claims for service connection were denied during his lifetime. The appellant is seeking DIC benefits under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1318, but the claim is denied as there was no entitlement to receive compensation at the time of death.

The veteran withdrew his appeal for service connection of a left lung condition and bilateral hearing loss, as well as the claim regarding CUE in the February 1970 rating decision. The claims are therefore dismissed.

The veteran's claims for service connection for degenerative joint disease of the cervical spine, right ear hearing loss, and prostate cancer were denied as there is no competent evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not meet the criteria for service connection for left ear hearing loss, hypoglycemic attack, or memory loss. The RO assigned a maximum disability rating of 40 percent for fibromyalgia with headaches, sleeplessness, fatigue, and diffuse multiple joint pain, which is the highest schedular evaluation available under Diagnostic Code 5025.

The Board denied service connection for right ear hearing loss and left ear infection, finding no link between the conditions and active service.,An initial compensable evaluation for left ear hearing loss was also denied.

The Board has restored the veteran's 10% disability rating for his service-connected hearing loss, finding that the reduction was improper due to insufficient evidence of improvement in his hearing loss.