Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) decisions — 2011

The Veteran's hypertension was not related to service, but his current stomach disorder is presumed to have been incurred during service.,His hearing loss and tinnitus were not related to service.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral tinnitus and a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss, finding that there was no evidence to support these claims.

The Veteran withdrew his claims for increased disability ratings for service-connected tinnitus and hearing loss.

The Board has found that the Veteran's tinnitus is likely related to service, but his back injury residuals are not shown to be directly related to service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus have been denied as there is no evidence of a current disability or causation to military service.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, including whether they are related to service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his service-connected bilateral hearing loss and finds in favor of granting service connection for tinnitus.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are due to noise exposure during his military service, including combat in Vietnam. The decision grants service connection for these conditions.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there is no evidence to support a nexus between these conditions and his military service.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there is competent medical evidence relating these conditions to noise exposure during his military service.

The Board found that the Veteran's tinnitus was not incurred in or aggravated by service, as there is no evidence of a chronic condition present during service and current tinnitus is unrelated to any injury or disease in service.

The Board has dismissed the Veteran's appeals regarding service connection for hearing loss, tinnitus, a back disorder, a neck disorder, and nerve damage to the bilateral legs. The claim for an initial rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD remains pending.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, right shoulder disorder, right knee disorder, left knee disorder, and right hip disorder are denied as there is no competent evidence showing a direct relationship between these conditions and his military service.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no credible evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that further development is needed to determine the Veteran's current hearing loss and tinnitus, as well as his anxiety disorder. The claims are being remanded for additional examinations and consideration of all relevant evidence.

The Board found that the Veteran's tinnitus is not related to his service and denied his claim for service connection.

The Veteran's claimed hearing loss and tinnitus were not incurred in or aggravated by active service, nor may they be presumed to have been incurred therein.

The Board has determined that a new VA audio examination is necessary to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus. The case will be remanded for this purpose.

The Board has remanded the case due to additional evidence submitted without a waiver of RO consideration, and the Veteran requested that his appeal be remanded for RO consideration in the first instance.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for an effective date earlier than November 13, 2000, for the grant of service connection for tinnitus. The earliest possible effective date he may receive is that date.