Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Veteran's tinnitus was not incurred or aggravated in service and the Board finds that there is no evidence to support a finding of service connection.

The Veteran's tinnitus and bilateral hearing loss are found to be related to his military service, with the Board granting service connection for both conditions.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus, bilateral hearing loss, peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower and upper extremities, headaches, and a stomach disorder.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability and tinnitus due to procedural issues, and the Veteran is scheduled for a Travel Board hearing.

The Veteran's sinus disability, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus are all found to be related to service. The case is being remanded for additional development.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's in-service noise exposure likely caused his current condition. Service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is remanded due to insufficient evidence.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his military service, and thus denied both claims.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's right ear hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his active service, while left ear hearing loss is not clearly and unmistakably due to natural progression. Service connection for these conditions is granted.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus, residuals of a reaction to penicillin, broken nose, hemorrhoids, and pes planus. The evidence does not support the presence of current disabilities related to these conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection are not properly adjudicated and requires additional development, including obtaining medical opinions regarding the etiology of his hearing loss, tinnitus, and carpal tunnel syndrome.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to service and grants service connection for this condition. The claim for bilateral hearing loss remains pending as further development is required.

The Board has granted service connection for tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his active service. The issue of bilateral hearing loss remains pending as it was not addressed in this decision.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to service, including in-service noise exposure. The preponderance of evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus were not incurred during active service, and the Board finds that his claims for these conditions are denied.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the Veteran's symptoms began during his military service and have continued to the present.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are etiologically related to service, including exposure to acoustic trauma in combat service. As a result, both conditions have been granted service connection.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his military service, with equipoise in the evidence supporting this determination.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for heart disease, hypertension, alcohol abuse, and cirrhosis of the liver. The Veteran's PTSD was granted a 70% rating, but his right ear hearing loss and tinnitus were both rated as noncompensable.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development regarding whether the Veteran's tinnitus is proximately due to or chronically worsened by his service-connected psychotic disorder. The claim will be reconsidered after this development.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and a VA examination.