Citation Nr: 18158570 Decision Date: 12/17/18 Archive Date: 12/17/18 DOCKET NO. 17-04 551 DATE: December 17, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 70 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for sleep apnea with CPAP and asthma is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for allergic rhinitis is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral pes cavus is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for degenerative joint disease with spurring at C5-6 is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for left knee strain is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for dermatitis, onychomycosis, and genital warts is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for erectile dysfunction is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for prostatitis is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of percent for gastroesophageal reflux disease and hiatal hernia is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for left leg sciatica is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for left upper extremity (arm) radiculopathy is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for lumbar spine facet syndrome and degenerative arthritis is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 0 percent for tension headaches is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for deviated septum is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left foot plantar warts is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right arm radiculopathy is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right forearm condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right leg sciatica is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for sinusitis is remanded. Entitlement to an earlier effective date for special monthly compensation based on loss of use. Entitlement to an earlier effective date for service-connected conditions is remanded. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to in-service acoustic trauma. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1111, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from November 2000 to January 2016. This matter is on appeal from rating decisions dated April 2016 and July 2016. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. For the reasons that follow, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether his bilateral hearing loss was incurred in service. Therefore, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted. Here, the Board finds that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss. See June 2016 VA Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire. Therefore, the current diagnosis requirement is met. The second element is also met. The Veteran stated that he noticed his hearing was “degraded” since his deployment in 2009. See June 2016 VA Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire. He stated that during service he was exposed to acoustic trauma from IEDs, motors, weapons fire, and other noise from combat areas. He stated that he then needed the volume to be louder for him to hear things and that he had to read people’s lips in order to understand what they were saying. The Veteran’s statements are consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of the Veteran’s service, as evidenced by the Veteran’s military records. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (a). Therefore, the Board finds the Veteran’s statements that he was exposed to in-service acoustic trauma corroborated. Finally, the nexus element is met as the Board finds that there is a causal relationship between the current disability and the Veteran’s active duty service. The Board finds persuasive the June 2016 VA Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire, in which the VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not incurred in service. See June 2016 VA Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire. In forming this opinion, the VA examiner properly and thoroughly considered the lay statements, service records, and post-service treatment records of record. See Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295, 302-05 (2008); Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). Based on the foregoing, the Board finds the opinion to be sufficient and entitled to probative weight. There is also another positive nexus opinion of record dated February 2016. See February 2016 VA Disability Examinations Management Disability Benefits Questionnaire. The February 2016 examiner also opined that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to his military noise exposure. Furthermore, there are no negative direct service connection nexus opinions on file. Hence, the Board finds that the combined previously discussed medical evidence of record overall supports the finding that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss was incurred in service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.307, 4.124a; see also 38 U.S.C. § 5107; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Based on the foregoing, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Wise v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 517, 531 (2014) (“By requiring only an ‘approximate balance of positive and negative evidence’..., the nation, ‘in recognition of our debt to our veterans,’ has ‘taken upon itself the risk of error’ in awarding... benefits.”). REASONS FOR REMAND 1. The remaining claims on appeal are remanded. Additional evidence pertaining to the claims on appeal were submitted by the Veteran’s representative on a compact disc. On remand, those records should be electronically uploaded to the Veteran’s VBMS file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: (Continued on the next page)   1. Upload documents from the compact disc provided by the Veteran’s attorney to the electronic claims file, readjudicate the claims. Then, return the appeal to the Board. YVETTE R. WHITE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. J. Cho, Associate Counsel