Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) decisions — 2006

The veteran's service-connected tinnitus is assigned a 10 percent rating, the maximum schedular rating authorized under VA regulations. There is no legal basis for assigning a higher evaluation.

The veteran's request for separate 10 percent disability ratings for tinnitus in each ear was denied as there is no legal basis to award such ratings under the current VA rating criteria.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is already rated at the maximum schedular rating of 10 percent, and no separate ratings are warranted.

The veteran's claim for separate schedular ratings of 10 percent each ear for tinnitus is denied as the maximum schedular rating available under Diagnostic Code 6260, regardless of whether perceived in one or both ears, is a single 10 percent.

The veteran's claim for a higher rating for service-connected tinnitus is denied as the maximum schedular rating of 10 percent has been assigned and upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

The veteran's claim for separate 10 percent ratings for each ear of her tinnitus was denied because the maximum available rating under current regulations is already assigned (10 percent).

The veteran's service-connected tinnitus has been assigned the maximum schedular rating of 10 percent, which is the highest available under Diagnostic Code 6260. The Board denied the request for an increased rating as there is no legal basis to assign a separate rating for each ear.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is already assigned the maximum rating of 10 percent, and there is no legal basis for assigning a higher evaluation.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is already assigned the maximum evaluation of 10 percent, so separate evaluations for each ear are denied.

The veteran's claims for an increased rating for hearing loss and service connection for tinnitus were denied. The Board found that the veteran's hearing loss did not warrant a higher evaluation, and his tinnitus was not related to military noise exposure.

The July 1998 rating decision assigning a 10 percent disability evaluation for tinnitus was not found to contain clear and unmistakable error (CUE).

The Board found that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen the veteran's claims for service connection for defective hearing and tinnitus, as the evidence did not raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating these claims.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is already assigned the maximum disability rating of 10 percent, and therefore no legal basis exists for a separate schedular evaluation in each ear.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is assigned a maximum rating of 10 percent, and there is no legal basis for an evaluation in excess of this.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and scheduling a VA examination. The veteran's claims will be re-adjudicated after this process.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus do not warrant a compensable rating, as they are both rated at their maximum under applicable VA regulations. The claim for benign positional vertigo is also denied.

The veteran's claims for earlier effective dates on service connection for multiple disabilities, individual unemployability, and Dependents' Educational Assistance have been denied. The Board found that the preponderance of evidence is against a finding that the veteran filed claims prior to 1979.

The veteran's request for separate 10 percent disability ratings for bilateral tinnitus was denied as the current single 10 percent evaluation assigned is already the maximum under VA rating criteria.

The veteran's service-connected bilateral tinnitus is currently rated at the maximum of 10 percent, and there is no legal basis for a higher rating.

The veteran's service-connected tinnitus is currently rated at 10 percent, which is the maximum rating allowed under Diagnostic Code 6260. The Board has determined that there is no legal basis for assigning a higher evaluation.