Citation Nr: 18154271
Decision Date: 11/29/18	Archive Date: 11/29/18

DOCKET NO. 18-46 817
DATE:	November 29, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is granted.
FINDING OF FACT
The Veteran’s bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is related to in-service noise exposure.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss are met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
Generally, service connection may be granted for a disability or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303.  In order to establish service connection for a claimed disability, there must be (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability.  Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).
The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss.  The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of sensorineural hearing loss that is related to active service.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).
The first element of service connection is met as the Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss that began during active service.  November 2017 and November 2018 VA examinations shows the Veteran has a current diagnosis of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss.  
The second element of service connection is met as the evidence indicates that the Veteran was exposed to acoustic trauma during service.  A September 2018 statement of case conceded exposure to noise in service.
The third element of service connection requires a medical nexus.  Here, the record contains two competing medical nexus opinions.  A November 2017 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s hearing loss was not at least as likely as not caused by service because hearing thresholds at entrance and separation were within normal limits.  She additionally cited to medical literature noting that noise induced hearing loss will not progress once it is stopped.  In contrast,  November 2018 VA examiner found that it was at least as likely as not that hearing loss was related to noise exposure during service based on examination, the nature of noise exposure, reported history, and service medical records.  She noted that the Veteran had a history of noise exposure from boats, aircraft, and weapons due to his military duties, and stated that these high levels of noise are known to cause hearing loss.  
The Board finds that the competing opinions are probative as they are based on the evidence of record and general medical principles.  In light of this, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise.  
When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant.  38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990).  As such, the Board will resolve doubt in the Veteran’s favor and find that service connection is warranted bilateral hearing loss disability.  The claim is granted.
 
K. J. ALIBRANDO
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	S. Vang, Associate Counsel