Citation Nr: 18149966 Decision Date: 11/14/18 Archive Date: 11/14/18 DOCKET NO. 16-42 127 DATE: November 14, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT A preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is related to the Veteran’s military service or manifested to a compensable degree within one year from separation from service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.385, 4.85. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active military service from June 1974 to June 1980. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2016 rating decision of the VA Regional Office (RO) in Portland, Oregon. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service, even if the disability was initially diagnosed after service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The Board concedes that the Veteran experienced noise exposure in service of the type that could result in bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. 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, 4000 Hz is 40 dB or greater; 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. There are no audiometric findings in the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) that meet the above requirements. The Veteran’s January 1974 enlistment scores were as follows: HERTZ Jan. 1974 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 0 0 0 - 0 LEFT 0 0 0 - 0 The Veteran’s November 1979 separation exam scores were as follows: HERTZ Nov. 1979 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 10 10 0 0 0 LEFT 15 5 0 0 0 These scores were similar to in-service audiometric scores from February 1977. Both the entrance and separation examinations show the Veteran’s hearing was within normal limits, with some shifting in the auditory thresholds shown above between the time he entered the Air Force and the time he was discharged from active duty. The Veteran denied having any hearing problems on a report of medical history taken at the time he was discharged from active duty. In her November 2014 lay statement, the Veteran’s wife states that she has known the Veteran since August 1979 and that he has complained of ringing in his ears and not being able to hear well for as long as she known him. While the Veteran’s wife is competent to report the symptoms she observed or that were reported to her by the Veteran, she, as a lay person without audiological or medical training, is not competent to opine as to whether he has hearing loss for VA purposes. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. During the Veteran’s February 2015 VA examination for hearing loss, the Veteran’s audiometric scores met the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 and showed the Veteran had current hearing loss for VA purposes. However, because the Veteran’s audiometric test results from his enlistment and separation examinations were within normal limits, the examiner concluded that the Veteran’s current bilateral hearing loss was less likely than not caused by or a result of military noise exposure. The Veteran has presented no competent evidence showing the contrary or indicating that a hearing loss disability was manifest prior to February 2015, more than three decades after service. In the absence of such evidence, the Board finds no basis for remanding this case for a more detailed medical opinion to pinpoint the etiology, as there is no reasonable possibility that such an opinion would be favorable to the Veteran’s claim. The Veteran contends that he has a hearing loss disability as a result of his exposure to loud noises, small arms, missile launch equipment, jet aircraft, and machinery in the military. See August 2016 Form 9 Statement. In this regard, the Board is cognizant that service connection is in effect for tinnitus, and the Board does not dispute the Veteran’s reports of in-service noise exposure. That said, tinnitus is a disability that is readily capable of lay observation and does not require audiometric testing for a diagnosis, as distinguished from a hearing loss disability. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). Competent evidence is still needed to link a current bilateral hearing loss disability to noise exposure in service. While the Veteran is competent to report that he has experienced difficulty hearing consistently since service, he lacks the medical or audiological training and credentials to competently opine on at what time a hearing loss disability arose for VA purposes, as described above and in 38 C.F.R. § 3.385, or the etiology of such hearing loss disability. The issue is medically complex, as it requires the conducting and interpretation of precise audiometric testing. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). In sum, the preponderance of the evidence does not support the Veteran’s claim that his current bilateral hearing loss disability was caused by or arose during service. Accordingly, the claim must be denied. A. C. MACKENZIE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Evan Thomas Hicks