Citation Nr: 18159349 Decision Date: 12/18/18 Archive Date: 12/18/18 DOCKET NO. 17-22 721 DATE: December 18, 2018 ORDER Service connection for hearing loss is denied. Service connection for tinnitus is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT There is no an indication of an in-service noise injury or diagnosis, no indication of a current diagnosis of hearing loss or tinnitus, and no indication of a nexus to service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for hearing loss are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a), 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from January 1962 to June 1964. The case is on appeal from an August 2016 rating decision. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. “To establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a veteran must show: “(1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service”—the so-called “nexus” requirement.” Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2010) (quoting Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004)). Service connection for hearing loss may be granted where there is credible evidence of acoustic trauma due to significant noise exposure in service, post-service audiometric findings meeting the regulatory requirements for hearing loss disability for VA purposes, and a medically sound basis upon which to attribute the post-service findings to the injury in service (as opposed to intercurrent causes). Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 159 (1993). Thresholds for normal hearing are between 0 and 20 decibels, and higher thresholds show some degree of hearing loss. Hensley, 5 Vet. App. at 157. 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 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater, or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 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. 1. Service connection for hearing loss 2. Service connection for tinnitus As the issues are related, the Board will address them together. Specifically, the Veteran filed a claim of service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus. He provided no specific contentions as to why he feels service connection is warranted for either claim. The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that the evidence does not establish (a) an in-service event, (b) that hearing loss or tinnitus began during service, or (c) a current diagnosis of hearing loss or tinnitus, or (d) a nexus to service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a), (d). First, the evidence does not establish an in-service event, injury, or disease. His service treatment records (STRs) include a service separation examination from March 1964, which reflects audiometry test results. It is unclear whether the auditory thresholds at that time were recorded using the American Standards Association (ASA) units or International Standards Organization-American National Standards Institute (ISO-ANSI) units. As it relates to VA examinations and VA records, audiological reports were routinely converted from ISO-ANSI results to ASA units until the end of 1975 because the regulatory standard for evaluating hearing loss was not changed to require ISO-ANSI units until September 9, 1975. The March 1964 separation examination was conducted prior to September 9, 1975, so the Board will therefore consider the recorded metrics under both standards, relying on the unit measurements most favorable to the Veteran’s appeal. The ISO-ANSI standards are given in parentheses. HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 0 (15) 5 (15) 5 (15) -- 5 (10) LEFT 0 (15) 5 (15) 5 (15) -- 5 (10) These results, regardless of which standard is considered, do not reflect a hearing loss disability under § 3.385. The Veteran has not otherwise provided any indication as to how he might have been exposed to noise during service. His military occupational specialty (MOS) during service was Petroleum Storage Specialist, 552.10. This MOS is associated with a low probability of exposure to hazardous noise. Thus, there is no evidentiary basis for finding exposure to a noise injury during service. There is also no indication of a current diagnosis or a nexus to service. The Veteran has not undergone any audiometry testing to determine if he has a hearing loss impairment meeting VA’s definition of a disability under § 3.385 or a diagnosis of tinnitus. (Continued on the next page)   To this extent, a lay person would generally be competent to identify symptoms of tinnitus and hearing loss, including since service. See, e.g., Fountain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 258, 274-75 (2015); See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App 370, 374-75 (2002). The instant Veteran, however, has not indicated such symptoms. The only indication is on his VA Form 21-526EZ, where he wrote that the claimed disabilities were hearing loss and tinnitus. He provided no statement giving context to this claim. The Board finds no basis for remanding the claim for a VA examination based on this limited record. The identification of the claims on the claim form alone is not an indication of a current diagnosis or symptoms of such or a nexus to service. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4)(i); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83 (2006). Absent an indication of an in-service event, injury or disease, or an indication of a current diagnosis and nexus to service, the Board finds that the appeal is denied. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. Bosely, Counsel