BVA Case 20-6853: Back
BVAReal Board of Veterans' Appeals decision · July 6, 2023 · MICHELLE L. KANE
Conditions Claimed
BackHearing LossTinnitusHipEye
Official 2026 VA monthly compensation, including the 2.8% COLA increase.
Dependent add-ons start at a 30% rating. Child-only and dependent-parent rates: see the full 2026 pay chart.
2026 base rates, all ratings (veteran alone)
| Rating | Monthly (2026, incl. 2.8% COLA) |
|---|---|
| 10% | $180.42 |
| 20% | $356.66 |
| 30% | $552.47 |
| 40% | $795.84 |
| 50% | $1,132.90 |
| 60% | $1,435.02 |
| 70% | $1,808.45 |
| 80% | $2,102.15 |
| 90% | $2,362.30 |
| 100% | $3,938.58 |
Referral disclosure: VetAid earns a referral fee if you become a paying REE Medical client through this link — it helps keep this site free. REE Medical provides paid medical evidence; it is not a law firm, VSO, or claims agent, and VetAid has not independently verified its services. VSOs and VA-accredited representatives will help you file your claim at no cost, and no one can guarantee a rating increase.
Issues on Appeal
BackHearing LossTinnitusHipEye
Why It Was Decided This Way
Most recently, the Board denied the above-listed claim in a May 2022 Board Decision.
For disabilities that are not service-connected under 38 C.
303(d) The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease.
The March 2022 VA examiner opined that the Veteran's sensorineural hearing loss is not at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including conceded exposure to hazardous noise which, the examiner noted, included exposure to "firearms, loud vehicles, and firing ranges" as well as his military occupation specialty (MOS) that "had a High probability for hazardous noise.
The examiner explained that exposure to hazardous noise alone does not entail auditory damage, but there must be additional evidence indicating "a nexus of auditory damage to relate current hearing loss to military noise and not another etiology.
See also February 2023 JMR (noting the Board's May 2022 decision did not address this issue).
Moreover, the VA examiner, the only witness competent to opine on the issue, found that the medical evidence in this case indicated there was not a nexus between the in-service hazardous noise exposure and the current hearing loss.
The representatives appear to suggest that the VA examiner was required to cite medical arguments to support her opinion that, without permanent auditory damage in service, there could be no nexus to later hearing loss.
Authorities Cited
Regulations Cited (38 CFR / 38 USC)
Denial Type
No Nexus|Not Service Connected|Duty To Assist
Find Similar Precedent for Your Claim
VetAid's analyzer maps your claim against thousands of real Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions like this one — surfacing the exact case law that supports your arguments.
Run my claim through VetAid →