Citation Nr: 18142648 Decision Date: 10/17/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-30 801 DATE: October 17, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT The competent evidence of record does not demonstrate bilateral hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (b) (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1995 to April 2000 and from November 2000 to August 2005. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a September 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Lincoln, Nebraska. The Veteran’s claims file is currently under the jurisdiction of the Houston, Texas RO. 1. Entitlement to Service Connection for Bilateral Hearing Loss The Veteran contends that he currently has a bilateral hearing loss disability that is related to in-service hazardous noise exposure. See VA Form 9, received June 2016. For the purposes of applying the laws administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz (Hz) is 40 decibels (dB) or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hz are 26 dB or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Thus, a hearing loss disability for VA purposes is defined by 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 and is based on objective audiometric and speech recognition testing. In this case, the record is absent for evidence of current hearing loss disability of either ear as defined under 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 at any time during the appeal period or in proximity to the claim for service connection. See McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319 (2007); Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289 (2013). Specifically, the May 2015 VA examination includes an audiogram report revealing the following audiometric findings, measured in decibels: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 20 25 25 30 25 LEFT 25 25 25 30 30 The Veteran had 100 percent speech discrimination in the right ear and 100 percent speech discrimination in the left ear using the Maryland CNC word list. Thus, the audiological testing conducted in conjunction with the May 2015 VA examination did not reveal findings that would indicate a hearing loss disability for VA purposes under 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 in either ear. There are no other audiological measurements of record dated any time during the appeal period or in proximity to the claim for service connection that shows a hearing loss disability for VA purposes in either ear. The Board has considered the Veteran’s contention that he has hearing loss that began during his active service. The Veteran, as a lay person, is competent to report that he has difficulty hearing; however, he is not competent to diagnose a hearing loss disability for VA purposes. See Kahana, 24 Vet. App. at 435; Buchanan, 451 F.3d at 1336-37. Diagnosing a hearing loss disability for VA purposes involves diagnostic medical testing and requires medical expertise and knowledge the Veteran has not been shown to possess. Therefore, the Veteran’s reports of hearing loss do not constitute competent evidence of bilateral hearing loss disability for VA purposes under 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. As noted above, in the absence of proof of a current disability, there can be no valid claim. Brammer, 3 Vet. App. at 225. In this case the record is absent for competent evidence of bilateral hearing loss disability for VA purposes during or in proximity to the appeal period. Without evidence of current bilateral hearing loss disability for VA purposes, the Board need not address the other elements of service connection. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is not for application, and the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); see also Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. 49. VA’s Duty to Notify and Assist With respect to the Veteran’s claim herein, VA has met all statutory and regulatory notice and duty to assist provisions. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5106, 5107, 5126 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.156(a), 3.159, 3.326 (2017); see also Scott v. McDonald, 789 F.3d 1375 (Fed. Cir. 2015). U. R. POWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD B. G. LeMoine, Associate Counsel