Citation Nr: 18157011 Decision Date: 12/11/18 Archive Date: 12/11/18 DOCKET NO. 17-16 372 DATE: December 11, 2018 ORDER Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, bilateral hearing loss is etiologically related to his military service. 2. Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, tinnitus is etiologically related to his military service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b), 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from November 1957 to November 1961. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2016 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Service Connection 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty, in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131. Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). Service connection for hearing loss may be granted where there is credible evidence of acoustic trauma due to significant noise exposure in service, where post-service audiometric findings indicate that there is a hearing loss disability, and where there is a sound basis upon which to attribute the post-service findings to the in-service injury (as opposed to incurrent causes). See Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 157-59 (1993). For the purposes of the 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 is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. “The threshold for normal hearing is between 0 and 20 [decibels], and higher thresholds indicate some degree of hearing loss.” Hensley, 5 Vet. App. at 157. The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. For the reasons that follow, the Board finds that service connection is warranted for those disabilities. The Veteran’s hearing was noted as 15/15 by whispered voice and spoken voice testing at separation from service in November 1961. No audiological testing was done during his period of service. The Veteran’s military occupational specialty in the Marine Corps was rifleman. His service personnel records indicate that he was assigned to the USS Ticonderoga, and had more than two years of sea duty. On a VA examination in April 2016 an examiner noted that the Veteran reported “shipboard noise on an aircraft carrier, flight deck noise, jets, 5 inch 38s and gunfire with no use of ear protection.” The Veteran also reported post-military occupational noise exposure as a firefighter for 20 years, where he was exposed to siren noise with no use of ear protection. The Veteran reported that he was currently retired, and that he shoots as a hobby while wearing ear protection. Pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 20 40 75 75 80 LEFT 20 30 75 95 105 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 80 percent in the right ear and 88 percent in the left ear. The examiner noted sensorineural hearing loss in both ears. Tinnitus was also noted. The VA examiner stated that she could not “determine a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s hearing loss without resorting to speculation: Rationale: since there are no frequency specific hearing levels at time of separation, based on the Veteran’s history of inservice and post-service noise exposure, it is not possible to determine if the hearing loss is related to inservice noise exposure without resorting to mere speculation.” With respect to the Veteran’s tinnitus, the examiner stated: “Since there is no documentation of tinnitus in the Veteran’s [service treatment records], based on the Veteran’s history of inservice and post-service noise exposure, it is not possible to determine if the tinnitus is related to inservice noise exposure without resorting to mere speculation.” The record also includes a December 2015 Disability Benefits Questionnaire completed by an audiologist. The audiologist diagnosed bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus, and provided the following opinion: Overall, in my judgement, it is at least as likely as not (50% probability or greater) that [the Veteran]’s bilateral hearing loss was caused by or as a result of hazardous noise exposure during military service. The rationale for this conclusion is that [the Veteran] was exposed to hazardous noise during time of service without proper hearing protection; citing instances when he was routine exposed to firearm muzzle blasts at close proximity especially during basic training. Additionally, [the Veteran] is right-handed and the hearing loss is slightly worse in the left ear in the higher frequencies, which supports his report of the pattern of noise-induced hearing loss generally exhibited when discharging firearms. There is no other possible explanation given in his history for this asymmetry. It also is as likely as not (50% probability or greater) that [the Veteran]’s tinnitus was caused by or as a result of these same events during military service because he first recalls experiencing tinnitus during his time in basic training and service. The bilateral tinnitus would be consistent with damage to cochlear hair cells due to loud noise exposure. The auditory findings obtained from objective testing during the VA examination satisfies the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385; the Veteran’s bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is considered a disability for VA purposes. The Board also notes that sensorineural hearing loss is considered a chronic disease for the purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b). See 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a) (identifying “[o]ther organic diseases of the nervous system” as a chronic disease); Fountain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 258, 264 (2015). The Veteran has stated in writing and/or reported to a VA examiner that he experienced tinnitus beginning in service, and worsened hearing acuity over the years. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board finds the statements of the Veteran to be credible. The Board also finds that the Veteran is competent to render such statements as they are based upon readily observable symptoms. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (a)(2); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469-70 (1994); see also Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374-75 (2002). That is not to say that the Veteran is competent to diagnose sensorineural hearing loss - he is not - rather the Board’s finding is limited to his ability to observe a decrease in hearing acuity and its impact on his daily life, observations which do not require any specialized medical training or expertise. He is also competent to report tinnitus. (Continued on the next page)   The Board finds the statements of the Veteran to be probative, as is the December 2015 audiologist’s opinion of record. Resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds this evidence to be sufficient to establish that the Veteran experiences tinnitus and hearing loss from in-service noise exposure. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Accordingly, service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is warranted. D. JOHNSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. G. Mazzucchelli, Counsel