Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus and erectile dysfunction. The decision found that there was no evidence of a nexus between these conditions and service, with the exception of tinnitus which may be presumed related to in-service noise exposure.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current condition is at least as likely as not related to in-service acoustic trauma.

The Veteran's tinnitus is granted as service-connected due to in-service noise exposure, and the Board finds that all reasonable doubt has been resolved in her favor.

The Board denied a TDIU on an extra-schedular basis prior to September 7, 2007 due to the Veteran's service-connected disabilities not rendering him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's tinnitus was incurred during active service and has persisted since his active duty service, meeting the criteria for service connection.

The Veteran's tinnitus was incurred during active service and has persisted since her active duty service, meeting the criteria for service connection.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's tinnitus began in-service and continues to this day. The decision is based on the Veteran's credible statements of ongoing tinnitus since his separation from active service.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus, finding that it is directly related to noise exposure during their military service.

The Board has granted the appeal as the Veteran expressed dissatisfaction with a December 1971 decision denying an increased rating for hearing loss disability, which constitutes a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD).

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that these conditions are related to in-service acoustic trauma.

The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are granted as service connected due to exposure to loud noise during active duty, with the presumption of service connection.

Service connection is granted for tinnitus. The Veteran's service records show that he was exposed to noise during service and has reported hearing loss since then.,The claim for service connection for IHD based on herbicide exposure is being remanded due to the need for further development regarding the Veteran's claimed exposure.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current conditions are at least as likely as not related to his in-service noise exposure. The decision is based on credible lay evidence and positive medical opinions.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and bilateral tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's symptoms have been continuous since service. The decision is based on the presumption of chronicity due to in-service acoustic trauma.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus based on continuous post-service symptoms and the presumption of chronic disease under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b).

The Board denied service connection for tinnitus as there was no in-service occurrence and the current condition is not related to noise exposure during service.

The Veteran's tinnitus rating is restored to 10 percent, effective May 29, 2019. The Board denied the TDIU claim as his service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's current tinnitus is at least as likely as not related to his military service due to noise exposure during service.

The Board has granted the Veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus, finding that there is at least equipoise evidence to support a nexus between his in-service noise exposure and current tinnitus.

The Veteran's tinnitus is granted as it began due to noise exposure during his military service, and the Board found in favor of the Veteran based on his testimony.