Citation Nr: 18142533 Decision Date: 10/17/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-22 545 DATE: October 17, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran has hearing loss due to service, to include specific in-service event, injury, or disease. 2. The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran has tinnitus due to service, to include specific in-service event, injury, or disease. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for hearing loss are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. 2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for tinnitus are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from March 1963 to March 1965. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Legal Criteria A veteran is entitled to VA disability compensation if there is disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in active service, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110. Generally, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship, or nexus, between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection for impaired hearing shall only be established when hearing status, as determined by audiometric testing, meets specified puretone and speech recognition criteria. Audiometric testing measures threshold hearing levels (in decibels) over a range of frequencies (in Hertz). Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 158 (1993). For the purposes of applying the laws administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. For service connection, in-service noise exposure need not be the only source of acoustic trauma; it must only be a contributing source. The absence of in-service evidence of hearing loss disability during a veteran’s period of active duty is not fatal to a claim for service connection. Ledford v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 87, 89 (1992). Competent evidence of a current hearing loss disability (i.e., one meeting the requirements of section 3.385, as noted above), and a medically sound basis for attributing such disability to service, may serve as a basis for a grant of service connection for hearing loss disability. Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 158 (1993). Hearing loss and tinnitus are recognized by VA as chronic diseases under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013); Fountain v. McDonald, Vet. App. 13-0540 (2015). Where a chronic disease is shown as such in service, subsequent manifestations of the same chronic disease at any later date, however remote, are service connected unless clearly attributable to intercurrent causes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b). Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss due to in-service noise exposure. Specifically, the Veteran reports that as a rifleman he was exposed to weapons on the firing range without hearing protection. See June 2015 C&P Exam. Evidence shows that the Veteran has a current hearing loss disability. See June 2015 C&P exam at 1. Similarly, the Veteran’s contentions of noise exposure while in service establish an in-service event. However, the record does not establish a nexus between the Veteran’s in-service injury and current disability. Service treatment records do not indicate any complaints regarding hearing loss. Moreover, the Veteran’s entrance and exit exams were normal. See February 2006 STR Medical at 5, 45. Post service, the Veteran reported a bilateral ear ache in January 2004. See June 2007 Medical Treatment Record Non- Government Facility at 11. However, the record contains no evidence of ongoing treatment for earache. The record also contains no evidence of hearing loss until forty years after the Veteran was discharged from the military. The Veteran reported hearing loss and symptoms of tinnitus in March 2005. However, an otoscopy was unremarkable in both ears. See March 2007 Medical Treatment Record-Government Facility at 134. A subsequent April 2005 examination noted mild sensorineural hearing loss with a conductive component at 1000 Hertz. The Veteran was also noted to have a fluctuating baseline at 500 Hertz and 2000 Hertz bilaterally. While June 2005 treatment records noted the Veteran’s hearing as a barrier to learning, in July 2005 the Veteran denied having any problems hearing or understanding caregivers. See August 2010 Medical Treatment Record- Government Facility at 66, 109. July 2010 treatment records note the Veteran’s hearing status as good. See October 20120 CAPRI at 231. August 2012 and February 2013 treatment records note no significant changes in hearing. See October 2012 CAPRI at 13, 17. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in June 2015. See June 2015 C&P Exam at 1. Based on the examination, the examiner opined that the Veteran’s hearing loss was not as least as likely as not caused by or a result of an event in military service. The examiner’s opinion was based on a review of the Veteran’s military records which indicated normal hearing upon entrance in 1963 and stable hearing noted at the Veteran’s exit exam. The examiner’s opinion was also based on no evidence of complaints regarding hearing loss and a March 2005 audiological evaluation, 40 years post service, noting essentially normal hearing. The Board affords probative weight to this opinion. The examiner’s opinion is based on audiological testing as well as a review of the evidence of record. Further, this opinion is consistent with the evidence of record that largely shows no significant complaints regarding hearing loss until many years after his separation from service. The Veteran was subsequently noted to have some mild hearing loss, however this occurred more than 40 years after service. Overall, the record does not establish a nexus between the Veteran’s current hearing loss and an in-service event. The Veteran it not competent to relate his in-service noise exposure to his current diagnosis of hearing loss. Accordingly, service connection for hearing loss is denied. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran also contends that he is entitled to service connection for tinnitus due to noise exposure in service. See July 2015 NOD. While the record establishes a current disability of tinnitus, and the Veteran had in-service noise exposure, there is no evidence of a nexus between the two. Service treatment records do not note any complaints of tinnitus or ringing in the Veteran’s ears. The Veteran’s entrance exam was normal, and the Veteran denied any difficulty with his ears during his exit examination. During his June 2015 VA examination, the Veteran endorsed symptoms of tinnitus but did not know when his tinnitus began. See June 2015 C&P Exam. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s tinnitus is as least as likely as not related to the Veteran’s hearing loss. The Board affords weight to this opinion as it is based on an examination of the Veteran and a review of the evidence of record. (Continued on the next page)   Based on the evidence of record showing no complaints of tinnitus until his February 2015 claim, normal exit examination, and the Veteran’s inability to recall the onset of his tinnitus, the Board finds that there is no nexus between the Veteran’s current tinnitus and any in-service noise exposure. As noted above, his tinnitus has been related to his hearing loss, but the Board has denied this claim. Accordingly, the Veteran is not entitled to service connection for his tinnitus. In S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Wimbish, Associate Counsel