Citation Nr: 18149868 Decision Date: 11/14/18 Archive Date: 11/13/18 DOCKET NO. 16-46 711 DATE: November 14, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss is granted. Entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served honorably in the United States Air Force from May 1969 to February 1973 and in the United States Air Force Reserves until December 1991. Service Connection Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss Under the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 1131. Generally, the evidence must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 505 (1995); see Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (noting that nexus may be demonstrated by a showing of continuity of symptomatology where the disability claimed qualifies as a chronic disease listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a)). For the purpose of applying the laws administered by the VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 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. With regard to a present disability, an April 2014 VA audiogram shows hearing acuity of 40dB or more at 4000Hz in the right ear and at least three auditory thresholds that are 26 dB or greater in the left ear. This meets the definition of hearing loss for VA purposes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 (2017). The first element of Shedden/Caluza is met. With regard to an in-service event, the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) show no evidence of hearing loss. Periodic routine examinations showed normal hearing during active service in May 1969, August 1970, and January 1973. The STRs also continue to show normal hearing during periodic examination throughout his reserve service. However, the Veteran has claimed noise exposure in service. During the April 2014 VA examination, the Veteran stated he experienced noise exposure during deployments to Vietnam including exposure to rockets, helicopters, quad 50’s, and F4’s. He also recalled a rocket hit close to his location while in Da Nang. The Veteran reported only occasional use of hearing protection. The Veteran’s DD-214 indicates that he had a military occupational specialty (MOS) of an avionics instruments systems specialists and notes foreign service. The Board finds that the Veteran is competent to report exposure to loud noise in service, and that such assertion is credible because it is consistent with the circumstances of service. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As such, the second element of Shedden/Caluza is met. Although an in-service event and current disability have been established, as noted above, this is not sufficient to warrant service connection. There still must be competent medical evidence of a nexus between the Veteran’s conceded in-service noise exposure and his current bilateral hearing loss disability. See Shedden, supra. In April 2014, the Veteran underwent a VA audiological examination. The examiner opined the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss was not as least as likely as caused by or a result of an in-service event. The examiner opined the lack of threshold shift in the service treatment records did not support the etiology of his bilateral hearing loss was the Veteran’s active service. Further, the examiner noted while the Veteran was exposed to noise in service, this noise did not result in hearing loss as demonstrated by the normal hearing evaluations throughout the Veteran’s STRs. Further, the Veteran indicated he had no concerns of hearing loss during his final health evaluation in January 1990 following reserve service. In August 2016, the Veteran underwent a private audiological examination. The examiner opined it is more likely than not that the Veteran’s current hearing loss is related to his military noise exposure. The examiner provided that the opinion was supported due to the case history of excessive noise while service and the notched configuration of hearing loss in his left ear. The Veteran has provided statements regarding the nature of his bilateral hearing loss. In March 2015 and March 2016 statements, the Veteran stated he worked on the flight line and was regularly exposed to loud aircraft noises. Also, while overseas in Vietnam, the Veteran recounted exposure to rocket and mortar explosions in his close proximity without hearing protection. After reviewing the evidence of record, the Board finds that the evidence is, at minimum, in equipoise regarding the question of whether the Veteran’s current bilateral hearing loss is related to his military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The benefit of the doubt will be conferred in the Veteran’s favor. The service-connection claim for bilateral hearing loss is granted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-56 (1990). A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Laura A. Crawford, Associate Counsel