Hearing loss Board decisions

The veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and consideration of new evidence.

The Board denied service connection for dizziness and an increased rating for left ear hearing loss due to a lack of medical evidence linking these conditions to the veteran's military service.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is not related to his military service, as evidenced by normal hearing at separation and lack of medical opinion supporting noise exposure. The claim for service connection was denied.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have current disabilities for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, and therefore service connection is denied.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for otitis externa, pharyngitis, hearing loss, and low back disability. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions are related to military service.

The Board found that the veteran's diabetes mellitus, bilateral hearing loss, and hypoglycemia with black outs were not incurred in or aggravated by active military service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for malaria, intestinal polyps, fungus disorder of the legs and feet, heart disorder (to include hypertension), bilateral hearing loss, and neck disorder. The evidence does not show any current disability related to these conditions.

The Board found that the appellant did not incur tinnitus, right ear hearing loss, or migraine headaches due to any incident of active military service and denied these claims.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional evidence and a new audiological examination.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss does not warrant a compensable evaluation, as his audiometric results do not meet the criteria for an increased rating under VA's disability rating schedule.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased evaluations for various service-connected conditions, including tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss. The veteran was not granted any additional ratings.

The VA has determined that the veteran's right ear hearing loss disability does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation under the applicable rating schedule.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and remanded the case to obtain a VA examination. The decision on tinnitus is pending.

The Board has ordered additional development to verify the dates of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA) during the appellant's service in the Missouri Army National Guard and Army Reserves, specifically his time with the 138th Inf. Div. Tank Company from October 1954 to October 1960.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hand disorder and residuals of leptospirosis, but denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The veteran's retropatellar pain syndrome of the right knee is currently rated at 10 percent.

The Board found that the veteran's pre-existing left ear hearing loss did not worsen during service and denied his claim for service connection.

The veteran's claim for a compensable rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss is being remanded due to the need for compliance with VCAA notice and duty-to-assist provisions, as well as additional medical examination.

The Board found that the veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss warranted a disability rating of 20 percent from March 25, 2003. The original claim for an increased rating was granted and the current effective date is not specified.

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss does not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA disability compensation regulations.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for an increased rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss, finding that it did not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.