Citation Nr: 18152499 Decision Date: 11/23/18 Archive Date: 11/23/18 DOCKET NO. 15-29 538 DATE: November 23, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss had its onset in service. 2. The Veteran’s tinnitus had its onset in service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(d). 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1969 to January 1972 with service in Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2012 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran presented sworn testimony at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in February 2017. The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. To establish service connection for the claimed disorders, the following criteria must be met: (1): evidence of a current disability; (2) evidence of an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and current disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; see also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Here, all three elements of service connection are established by competent and credible lay evidence of record. The Veteran reports that he first experienced ringing in his ears while serving in Vietnam around heavy artillery and explosives. The evidence shows that the Veteran was exposed to significant acoustic trauma in service. At the February 2017 hearing, the Veteran testified that he experiences ongoing ringing in his ears. The Board finds the Veteran’s statements regarding continued ringing in his ears since service are competent and credible, thus service connection is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. 3.303(a). As to bilateral hearing loss, the February 2012 VA examination shows the Veteran has bilateral hearing loss pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The Veteran testified that in-service he was exposed to acoustic trauma, like explosives and heavy artillery and loud machinery because of his MOS. The Veteran’s wife asserted that since she met him in June 1972 he had trouble hearing and that as a result, conversations and watching television are more difficult for the Veteran. See February 2017 statement ; February 2017 Hearing Transcript. The Veteran and his wife are competent and credible to report that within a year after separating from service, the Veteran experienced symptoms of hearing loss and has continuously experienced difficulties related to his hearing since that time. Further, the Veteran is competent and credible with respect to his statements that he always wore hearing protection during his post-service occupation as a tool and die maker. The Board notes the February 2012 examiner’s conclusion that the Veteran’s hearing loss was not related to service because there were no complaints at discharge. However, this opinion is entitled to less probative weight because it fails to consider the Veteran or his wife’s lay statements. As the Veteran was later diagnosed with bilateral hearing loss after experiencing continuous symptoms since service, service connection is warranted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K.Ijitimehin, Associate Counsel