Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's petitions to reopen claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, as new and material evidence was not received.

The veteran's claim for a total rating for compensation purposes based on individual unemployability under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a) was denied, but the case was referred to the Director of Compensation and Pension Service for extra-schedular consideration under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(b).

The Board granted service connection for chronic tinnitus, finding that it was likely related to the veteran's wartime noise exposure.

The Board denied the veteran's appeal for an initial compensable evaluation for tinnitus prior to June 10, 1999, as the evidence did not show persistent tinnitus during that period.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus as there was no evidence of onset during active service or etiological relationship to his service.

The veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus was granted, and he was awarded a 100% rating effective from the date of his last appeal. The claims for increased ratings for bilateral hearing loss and PTSD were denied.

The Board denied service connection for meningitis, sleep apnea, hypertension, a low back disability, plantar fasciitis, hearing loss, and tinnitus as well as for a respiratory disorder characterized by 'breathing problems' and vertigo, finding no evidence of these conditions during the veteran's active military service or any relationship to her service.

The veteran's claims for a compensable rating for left ear hearing loss, service connection for right ear hearing loss, and service connection for tinnitus are being remanded for additional development.

The appeal was denied as there is no legal basis for the assignment of separate schedular 10 percent disability ratings for bilateral tinnitus.

The veteran does not meet the criteria for special monthly pension by reason of being housebound or needing the aid and attendance of another.

The Board denied service connection for tinnitus as it was not etiologically related to the veteran's active military service or a service-connected disability.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and bilateral tinnitus as the conditions were not attributable to active service, nor first manifest within one year of separation from active service.

The Board denied service connection for a kidney disability, hypertension, colon disability, bilateral hearing loss disability, and tinnitus as there was no evidence to support that these conditions were incurred in or aggravated by active duty.

The Board granted a higher rating of 20 percent for the veteran's service-connected lumbosacral strain and DDD of the lumbar spine, effective November 16, 2007. The claim was denied for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, migraine headaches, tinnitus, and hypertension.

The veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for his service-connected tinnitus was denied as there is no legal basis for a higher rating.

The veteran's appeal for a scheduler rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral tinnitus was denied as there is no legal basis to award a separate schedular evaluation.

The veteran is entitled to a higher 30 percent rating for his imbalance and dizziness, but no greater. He is not entitled to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability.

The case is remanded for a VA examination to determine the etiology of the veteran's right ear hearing loss and tinnitus.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic otitis media, tinnitus, and bilateral hearing loss as new and material evidence was not received to reopen the claims, and no medical nexus between the claimed conditions and service was established.

The Board denied service connection for tinnitus and a left elbow disorder as there was no evidence of these conditions in service or for many months thereafter, and the weight of competent evidence did not relate them to active duty. The claims were also denied due to lack of medical nexus.