Citation Nr: 20002471 Decision Date: 01/14/20 Archive Date: 01/10/20 DOCKET NO. 16-35 354 DATE: January 14, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his bilateral hearing loss was incurred in service. 2. The Veteran’s tinnitus was incurred in service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.385 2. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active service in the Air Force from August 1955 to August 1959. Service Connection Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran contends that his duties and living conditions during military service involved exposure to very high levels of noise from jet aircraft. He asserted that he has been dealing with insidious hearing loss for many years where the decrease in hearing is not an immediate result of acoustic trauma but is gradual over time. Service treatment records do not reveal any complaint, diagnosis or treatment for any hearing loss disability. VA has conceded that the Veteran was exposed to acoustic trauma in service. See July 2016 Statement of the Case In a Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ), completed by the Veteran’s private provider and signed in February 2016, the Veteran was diagnosed with sensorineural hearing loss and reported that the onset was 1958, noise exposure aircraft. The provider detailed the Veteran’s inservice noise exposure and his current complaints of hearing loss and tinnitus. The provider said the Veteran’s hearing loss was more likely than not a result of noise exposure while serving in the military. Enclosed with the medical opinion was a History and Physical of the Veteran completed by the private provider that stated that the Veteran’s hearing loss began suddenly in 1958 and may be related to noise exposure. He had no history of exposure to ototoxic medications, ear infections, head injury, stroke, multiple ear infections, prior ear surgery, and ear trauma. The Veteran’s past medical history was noncontributory, and he had no family history of hearing loss. The Veteran was diagnosed with sensorineural hearing loss. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in April 2016 which showed a bilateral hearing loss pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The Veteran was diagnosed with right ear conductive hearing loss and sensorineural hearing loss, and left ear sensorineural hearing loss. The examiner concluded that the hearing loss was not likely related to service because the Veteran’s hearing was within normal limits at the time of separation from service; noise induced hearing loss will not continue to progress once the noise has stopped, and; there was a greater than 50-year gap since separation from service and the diagnosis of hearing loss. The Board finds the evidence is at least in equipoise and service connection is warranted. The Veteran has diagnosed hearing loss disability for VA compensation purposes, inservice noise exposure has been conceded, and there are both positive and negative nexus opinions. The basis of the negative VA opinion is based in part on the fact that there was no hearing loss at separation from service and the passage of time between separation from service and the development of hearing loss. The positive private opinion does not include a complete rationale. However, given that opinion, the Veteran’s competent and credible report of gradually worsening hearing for years and resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran contends that he was exposed to loud noise in service and that he has had ringing in his ears “forever” but never realized that it could be compensable or he would have claimed it sooner. Service treatment record do not reveal any complaint, diagnosis or treatment for any tinnitus. Tinnitus is diagnosed on the February 2016 DBQ and the April 2016 VA examination. The VA examiner concluded the tinnitus was associated with the Veteran’s hearing loss and not likely caused by or a result of military noise exposure. The Veteran is diagnosed with tinnitus, was exposed to loud noise during service and the Board had determined that his hearing loss is due to service. The April 2016 VA examination may have provided a negative opinion as to direct service connection, but said the tinnitus was associated with the now service-connected hearing loss. Service connection for tinnitus is warranted. M.E. LARKIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Robert J. Burriesci, Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.