Hearing loss Board decisions

The Board has determined that the veteran's hearing loss and diabetes mellitus are not related to his active duty service.,The right knee disability is considered not well-grounded as there is no competent medical evidence linking it to active duty service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for left ear hearing loss, finding that the evidence did not support a link between his current condition and his military service.

The Board found that the appellant's claim for an increased evaluation of his service-connected bilateral hearing loss was well-grounded and satisfied its duty to assist. However, it determined that the evidence did not support a higher rating than the current 40 percent assigned under both old and new VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities criteria. The Board also concluded that the substantive appeal regarding the issue of increased evaluation for residuals of right elbow dislocation was inadequate.

The Board denied service connection for a hearing loss disability due to the lack of evidence showing a well-grounded claim, despite the veteran's exposure to noise in service and current hearing loss.

The veteran's bilateral hearing loss is found to be due to exposure to acoustic trauma during service, and the Board grants service connection for this condition.

The VA has determined that the veteran's left ear hearing loss does not warrant a rating higher than 10 percent, as his current level of hearing impairment is considered noncompensable under both old and new criteria.

The Board found no medical evidence to support the claim that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss is related to his service, and thus denied the claim.

The Board has granted a 10 percent rating for tinnitus effective June 10, 2000. The veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss is well grounded. The low back disability claim was reopened and the new evidence supports the reopening of the claim.

The VA has determined that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss does not warrant an evaluation greater than 10 percent under either the former or revised rating criteria.

The Board found that the veteran's claims of bilateral hearing loss and headaches were not well-grounded, as there was no medical evidence linking these conditions to service.

The veteran's appeal for an increased evaluation for right ear hearing loss has been dismissed as the appellant withdrew his appeal.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection for loss of visual acuity, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and seizure disorder are not well-grounded.

The Board found the claim for service connection for left ear hearing loss not well grounded and denied it.

The VA denied the veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss, finding that his condition was neither incurred in nor caused by his military service.

The Board has reopened the claims for service connection for hearing loss and asbestosis, but denied both on the merits due to lack of evidence linking current conditions to military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for service connection are not well grounded and have been denied.

The VA has determined that the veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss does not warrant a compensable disability rating based on current audiometric test results.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claims for compensable evaluations for otitis media and bilateral hearing loss are denied as there is no evidence of a suppurative process or aural polyps associated with his otitis media, and consistent audiometric findings do not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation under Diagnostic Code 6100.

The Board found no medical evidence linking the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss to his military service, and thus denied the claim for service connection.

The Board found no evidence to support the veteran's claim that his right ear hearing loss was incurred in service or due to a service-connected condition, and thus denied the claim.