Vertigo & vestibular disorders decisions — 2011

The Board denied the Veteran's claims of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and Meniere's disease, finding that there was no clear and unmistakable evidence that these conditions preexisted service or were aggravated by service.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus. However, the evidence does not relate to a disease or injury in service, thus the claim remains denied.

The Board found that Meniere's syndrome was not incurred in or aggravated by service and is not proximately due to a service-connected disability.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining medical records and conducting a VA examination to determine the nature and likely etiology of his claimed vertigo.

The Veteran's vertigo, skin disorder of the right arm, headaches, and hepatitis C were not incurred in or aggravated by active military service.,Service connection was denied for all claimed conditions.

The Veteran's Meniere's disease with tinnitus has been rated at a combined 20 percent disability rating, as the condition is productive of occasional dizziness but not dizziness with staggering.

The Board found that the Veteran's Meniere's disease with hearing loss and tinnitus did not develop during service or as a result of any service-connected disability, including PTSD. The claim was denied.

The Board has granted service connection for vertigo, defective hearing, and tinnitus effective July 31, 1980. The Veteran's claim was based on his participation in atomic bomb testing during military service.

The Board has found no evidence of a service-connected disability for any of the conditions listed, including those related to mercury exposure.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to determine if the Veteran was exposed to herbicides or other chemicals during service, and whether his current conditions are related to such exposure.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a VA examination and further development of the record, including obtaining medical records and determining the baseline severity of the Veteran's Meniere's disease.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claimed conditions are not service connected due to lack of evidence showing a direct link between his in-service head injury and current symptoms.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded for additional development, including obtaining VA examinations to address the nature and etiology of his claimed conditions.

The Board granted service connection for vertigo/Meniere's disease, hypertension, and hepatitis C. The claims were remanded to the RO for additional development.

The VA determined that the Veteran's BPPV was not incurred or aggravated by service and is not related to a service-connected disability.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to address the Veteran's claims, including obtaining service treatment records and VA examination reports.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and vertigo are related to service, while his sleep apnea is not.,Service connection for bilateral hearing loss and vertigo is granted. Service connection for sleep apnea is denied.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for vertigo was denied as there is no evidence of a current disability related to his active duty service. The Board found that the Veteran's dizziness symptoms are associated with his service-connected chronic fatigue syndrome.

The Board has remanded the case for further proceedings, including a new examination to assess whether the Veteran's Meniere's disease is related to service. The issue of an earlier effective date for PTSD remains pending and will be addressed in a separate SOC if perfected by the Veteran.

The Board denied the appellant's request for an extension of her delimiting date for Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance (Chapter 35) benefits, finding that she was not eligible for such extension due to the passage of time since her initial eligibility determination.