Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) decisions — 2004

The veteran's appeal is being remanded to the RO for scheduling a video conference hearing at the RO. The case will be returned to the Board following appropriate appellate procedure.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for restoration of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and service connection for tinnitus. The decision is final.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for separate compensable ratings for service-connected bilateral tinnitus, finding that only a single 10 percent rating is authorized under Diagnostic Code 6260.

The Board has received notification from the appellant that they wish to withdraw their appeal, leading to its dismissal.

The Board has determined that the current rating of 10 percent for bilateral recurrent tinnitus is proper and may not be increased through the assignment of separate ratings for tinnitus in each ear under Diagnostic Code 6260.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the veteran's withdrawal of the appeal prior to a decision being made.

The veteran withdrew his appeal for an increased evaluation of bilateral tinnitus, currently rated as 10 percent disabling.

The Board has remanded the case to the RO for readjudication due to a significant change in the law with the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA). The veteran's claim for an effective date earlier than August 19, 1993, for service connection for tinnitus and for a compensable rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss is now pending.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the claim of service connection for hearing loss. The veteran's claims for tinnitus, cervical spine disorder, and respiratory disorders are remanded for further development.

The veteran's tinnitus is currently rated at 10 percent, the maximum schedular rating for recurrent tinnitus. The Board found that a separate evaluation for each ear was not warranted and that only a single 10 percent disability rating is authorized for tinnitus regardless of whether it is perceived as unilateral or bilateral.

The Board has determined that the appellant's service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation, and thus grants a total disability rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability.

The veteran's claims for service connection for PTSD, bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were granted. He was also granted initial evaluations of 10 percent for Type II diabetes mellitus, peripheral neuropathy of the right lower extremity, and peripheral neuropathy of the left lower extremity, effective from January 4, 2001 (diabetes mellitus) and October 23, 2001 (peripheral neuropathy of each lower extremity), respectively. The veteran's claim for a TDIU was denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral tinnitus, including entitlement to separate evaluation for each ear. The maximum schedular rating for tinnitus is 10 percent.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including VA medical examinations to determine if the veteran suffers from hepatitis C and tinnitus.

The Board found that the claimant's bilateral hearing loss and recurrent tinnitus were not incurred in or aggravated by active service.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were not incurred or aggravated during his military service, and thus denied his claims for service connection.

The veteran was granted service connection for PTSD, a back disorder, defective hearing, tinnitus, and gastrointestinal disorders as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation. The other issues were not granted.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development of the evidence, including a VA audiology examination to determine if his hearing loss and tinnitus are related to service.

The veteran's claim for separate, schedular 10 percent disability ratings for bilateral tinnitus is denied as a matter of law due to the regulatory scheme and diagnostic codes pertaining to the auditory system.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to properly adjudicate the veteran's claims, including obtaining medical opinions and evidence. The RO will then re-evaluate the claims in light of all pertinent evidence.