Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) decisions — 2019

The Veteran's tinnitus is currently rated at the maximum schedular rating of 10 percent, and no higher rating is warranted as there are no indications of other manifestations not covered by the schedular criteria.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's appeals for bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, heart disorder, neck disability, back disability, and acquired psychiatric disorder due to procedural issues and the need for further development of his service records.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were not shown in service or for many years thereafter, and are not otherwise related to active duty service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus was granted with an effective date of October 16, 2015.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for a skin disorder other than porphyria cutanea tarda, an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus, and an initial disability rating in excess of 30 percent prior to July 18, 2017, and in excess of 70 percent thereafter for PTSD have all been denied.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete information regarding employment status, SSA disability records, and VA treatment records. The Veteran's TDIU claim will be reconsidered after these additional records are obtained.

The Veteran's tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss are being remanded for further examination to determine their etiology. The service connection for both conditions is still pending.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities (PTSD, tinnitus, and bilateral hearing loss) do not render him unable to secure or retain substantially gainful employment.

The appeal regarding tinnitus is dismissed. The Veteran's erectile dysfunction is granted as secondary to his service-connected ischemic heart disease.

Service connection is granted for tinnitus. The appeal for TDIU is dismissed. Effective dates are denied for PTSD and left shoulder subluxation/capsular shift. Bilateral hearing loss remains remanded.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's ringing in his ears is related to military service. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss was denied as there was no evidence of a chronic disability during or within one year after service.

The Veteran's service-connected PTSD, tinnitus, and bilateral hearing loss preclude him from securing and following substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus have been denied as there is no evidence of their onset or development during service, and the Board finds that they are not related to service.

The Veteran's appeals of service connection for various conditions, including a heart condition, lymphocytic colitis, rashes, monoclonal gammopathy, and bilateral hearing loss were dismissed. The appeal for tinnitus was granted.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are at least as likely as not related to his in-service noise exposure, resulting in a grant of service connection for both conditions.

The Veteran's tinnitus, mild left ventricular hypertrophy, and sinusitis are all found to have onset during her active duty service. Service connection is granted for these conditions. The Veteran's PTSD is also granted an increased rating.

The Veteran's petition to reopen the previously denied claim for service connection for tinnitus is granted. The Board also remanded the cases of entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss and entitlement to service connection for tinnitus.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that there was insufficient evidence to support a determination that these conditions were incurred in or related to his military service.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus as the evidence did not show a relationship to military noise exposure or service.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal before the Board could make a decision, so the case is dismissed.