Tinnitus (ringing in the ears) Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for tinnitus and for a higher evaluation of his lumbar spine disability. The TDIU claim was also denied.

The Board has granted service connection for a low back disability, hearing loss, and tinnitus. The veteran's current conditions are rated at the 10% level.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a lung condition, hearing loss, and tinnitus as there is no evidence of these conditions in service or related to service.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and determined that new evidence supports a finding of in-service noise exposure, leading to current hearing impairment. The veteran's tinnitus claim is remanded.

The Board denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding no evidence of a nexus between the conditions and the veteran's military service.

The Board has determined that the appellant's current tinnitus is etiologically related to his active service and grants service connection for tinnitus.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, finding that the veteran's current disabilities are related to noise exposure during active military service.

The Board found that the veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus did not manifest during service or within one year of separation, and thus denied service connection for both conditions.

The Board found that the veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus did not have its onset during active service or result from disease or injury in service. The preponderance of evidence is against the claim, thus denying service connection.

The Board has granted the veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus, finding that his current condition is as likely due to noise exposure in service or associated with his service-connected hearing loss.

The VA determined that the veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him unemployable, and thus denied his claim for a total disability rating based on individual unemployability.

The Board found no evidence of hearing loss or tinnitus during service and denied the veteran's claim for service connection for tinnitus disability.

The veteran's claims for higher initial evaluations for rupture of the left Achilles tendon and bilateral hearing loss were denied. Service connection was not established for tendonitis of the left elbow, disability of the thoracic spine, disability of the left great toe, or disability of the right shoulder.

The Board has reopened the veteran's claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss, but denied both the reopening and the merits of the claim. The decision regarding tinnitus was also denied.

The Board has granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. For bilateral hearing loss, a noncompensable evaluation is assigned since the effective date of March 3, 2004. Service connection for tinnitus is granted.

The Board finds that the veteran's service-connected conditions do not prevent him from engaging in substantially gainful employment, and thus denies his claim for a TDIU.

The Board denied service connection for PTSD, tinnitus, gastrointestinal condition due to an undiagnosed illness, muscle pain due to an undiagnosed illness, and a nervous condition (claimed as sleep disturbance) due to an undiagnosed illness. The veteran's claims were not supported by medical evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a disability due to impaired hearing for VA purposes and his tinnitus is not related to service. The claim for lumbosacral strain, to include as secondary to a service-connected left foot disorder, is remanded for further development.

The Board has determined that the veteran's hearing loss, tinnitus, and right knee disability are not related to service. Therefore, service connection for these conditions is denied.

The Board has remanded the case for further examination and development due to incomplete responses in a previous VA examination report.