Hearing loss Board decisions

The veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability is related to acoustic trauma during his military service and the Board finds that this condition was incurred therein.

The Board has granted the veteran's claims of service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there is a reasonable doubt in favor of the veteran.

The Board found no evidence to support service connection for hearing loss, tinnitus, or left eye scarring. The veteran's tinea pedis and onychomycosis of both feet were rated as noncompensable since August 2001.

The Board has ordered a remand due to the need for an examination regarding whether the veteran's service-connected tinnitus caused or aggravated his hearing loss.

The Board found that the veteran's skin cancer, hearing loss, and tinnitus were not related to his military service. The claims for these conditions have been denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current disability of low back or bilateral hearing loss as defined by VA standards. The service connection claims for these conditions are denied.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings and service connection for various conditions, finding that the evidence does not support a higher rating or service connection based on the current medical findings.

The Board has granted service connection for a low back disability and found that the veteran's current low back condition is likely attributable to his period of active military service. The claim for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss remains pending as further development is needed.

The Board denied a rating in excess of 20 percent for bilateral hearing loss, effective March 1, 2004.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss as there is no current medical evidence of a diagnosed disability.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss was evaluated at 20 percent during the period from January 27, 2003 to October 31, 2005. This evaluation is appropriate based on his audiometric findings of Level IV in the right ear and Level VI in the left ear.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence linking these conditions to the veteran's military service. The claim for increased rating of dermatophytosis of the hands and feet is pending.

The VA determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss did not warrant a compensable rating.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have current hearing loss or tinnitus, and there is no evidence of a right knee disability related to service. Therefore, the claims for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and right knee disability are denied.

The Board found that the veteran's current hearing loss, tinnitus, and lung condition were not caused by his active military service from October 1962 to October 1964. Therefore, service connection for these conditions was denied.

The veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss is being remanded due to inconsistencies in the speech recognition scores and a need for further audiometric testing.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a bilateral hearing loss for VA compensation purposes attributable to his military service.

The veteran's appeal for increased ratings for tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss was denied as there is no legal basis to assign a schedular evaluation in excess of the maximum rating available under Diagnostic Code 6260.

The veteran's claim for an increased disability evaluation for bilateral hearing loss was denied. The claims to reopen the service connection for degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, cold injury to the upper and lower extremities, shell fragment wound of the right knee, and PTSD were also denied as new and material evidence had not been received.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for initial compensable ratings for right tympanic membrane perforation and bilateral hearing loss, finding that he was already receiving the maximum schedular evaluations.