Citation Nr: 21001562 Decision Date: 01/08/21 Archive Date: 01/08/21 DOCKET NO. 15-00 283A DATE: January 8, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence of record is against finding that the Veteran has had bilateral hearing loss disability at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from August 1986 to April 1988. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2012 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  The Veteran appeared at a July 2018 hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at the St. Petersburg, Florida, Regional Office. The hearing transcript is of record. 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability The Veteran asserts that he is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss because the claimed disability is the result of noise exposure in active service. Service connection may be established 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. To establish 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 (Fed. Cir. 2004). 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, 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. Congress specifically limited entitlement to service-connected disease or injury to cases where the incidents have resulted in a disability. In absence of proof a present disability there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). 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 any event, injury, or disease during service. The Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss disability and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or contemporary to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289 (2013); McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319 (2007). In a March 2012 VA examination, the Veteran was found to have normal hearing in both ears. The audiometric findings did not show that the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 Hertz were 40 decibels or greater; or that the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz were 26 decibels or greater; or that speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test were less than 94 percent. The examination found no thresholds higher than 20 decibels in either ear and the speech recognition scores were 96 percent in the right ear and 100 percent in the left ear. In an October 2019 VA examination, the Veteran was found to have normal hearing in both ears. The audiometric findings did not show that the auditory thresholds in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 Hertz were 40 decibels or greater; or that the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz were 26 decibels or greater; or that speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test were less than 94 percent. The examination found no thresholds higher than 20 decibels in either ear and the speech recognition scores were 100 percent in the both ears. The Board finds that neither VA examination meet the criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 to constitute hearing loss disability in either ear. The Board notes an August 2012 private treatment letter which opined that the Veteran had bilateral hearing loss that was probably the result of acoustic trauma in active service. There was no indication that the service medical records were reviewed. Furthermore, there is no indication that an audiogram was performed to ascertain if the Veteran had any hearing loss disability. Therefore, that private opinion is found to be of little probative value and is inadequate to establish the presence of hearing loss disability as defined by 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. An August 2018 private treatment record includes an audiogram. However, that audiogram did not show that the auditory thresholds in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000 Hertz were 40 decibels or greater; or that the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz were 26 decibels or greater; or that speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test were less than 94 percent. The examination found no thresholds higher than 25 decibels in either ear and the speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC test were 98 percent in the right ear and 100 percent in the left ear. While the Veteran believes he has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, he is not competent to provide a diagnosis as diagnosing hearing loss disability requires audiometric testing. The issue is medically complex, as it requires specialized medical education and the ability to interpret complicated diagnostic medical testing. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Consequently, the Board gives more probative weight to the competent medical evidence. Accordingly, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against a finding that the Veteran has hearing loss disability or has had hearing loss disability at any time during or contemporary to the claim period. Therefore, the claim must be denied. Harvey P. Roberts Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Cross, 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.