Citation Nr: 21001964 Decision Date: 01/12/21 Archive Date: 01/12/21 DOCKET NO. 16-18 060 DATE: January 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss disability did not have its onset during active service, sensorineural hearing loss was not manifest to a compensable degree within one year of service discharge, and the bilateral hearing loss disability is not otherwise related to active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the Navy from April 1958 to February 1964. The Veteran testified at a Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in September 2020. The record was left open for 90 days to allow the Veteran to submit additional evidence in support of his claim; however, no additional evidence has been submitted. The Veteran has alleged that he experienced close-range, high noise exposure from jets while working as a landing signal officer in the Navy. He reported that he did not experiencing hearing loss right away, but gradually over time. In general, under the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. Generally, the evidence 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. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); 38 U.S.C. § 5103(a). Additionally, where a veteran served 90 days or more of active service, and certain chronic diseases, such as sensorineural hearing loss, which is an organic disease of the nervous system, become manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more within one year after the date of separation from such service, such disease shall be presumed to have been incurred in service, even though there is no evidence of such disease during the period of service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(a). For the purpose 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, or 4000 Hertz (Hz) is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of these frequencies 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. VA policy has changed regarding the conversion of in-service audiograms. Formerly, the results of audiometric testing (i.e. puretone thresholds at various frequencies) during active service dated after October 31, 1967 were assumed to have been provided in units of measurement established by the International Standards Organization (ISO)-American National Standards Institute (ANSI). Audiometric data prior to October 31, 1967 was assumed to have been recorded in American Standards Association (ASA) units, and thus had to be converted to ISO-ANSI units to enable data comparison and to bring them in line with VA regulation pertaining to hearing loss, which is based on ISO-ANSI units. However, VA policy now is to consider audiometric data dated between January 1, 1967 and December 31, 1970 using either ISO-ANSI or ASA units, whichever is more favorable to the claimant, unless the audiogram clearly indicates which standard was used. The conversion from ASA to ISO-ANSI units is accomplished by adding 15 decibels at 500 Hz, 10 decibels at 1000 Hz, 2000 Hz, and 3000 Hz, and 5 decibels at 4000 Hz. The Board has carefully reviewed the evidence of record and finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the award of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The reasons follow. Audiometry testing from prior to the Veteran’s service did not show the presence of a hearing loss disability. The Veteran’s service treatment records are absent of complaints of or treatment for hearing loss. From 1958 to 1962, the Veteran’s service treatment records show multiple Reports of Medical Examination wherein the Veteran scored 15/15 on whispered and spoken voice testing and received normal clinical evaluations of the ears. On separation examination in January 1964, the Veteran again received a normal clinical evaluation of the ears. The examination included audiometry results that, upon conversion to the ISO-ANSI standard, showed pure tone thresholds, in decibels, as follows: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz RIGHT 10 5 0 5 0 LEFT 15 5 0 10 5 These results do not qualify as a hearing loss disability under VA regulations. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Following service, the evidence of record does not indicate that the Veteran complained of hearing loss, or otherwise show objective audiometric findings of a hearing loss disability, for 50 years after discharge from active duty. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in June 2015. On audiological testing, the recorded pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Maryland CNC RIGHT 15 15 35 50 60 100% LEFT 10 15 40 60 60 92% These results establish the existence of a present disability for purposes of service connection and the Veteran was assessed with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s hearing loss is less likely than not caused by or a result of an event in military service. As a rationale, the examiner stated that the Veteran had normal hearing in both ears upon separation from the military and that the course of noise-induced hearing loss demonstrates effects immediately following exposure that stabilizes or improves over time. The examiner stated that, therefore, military noise effects would have been evident upon the 1964 separation hearing exam referenced above. As hearing was normal in both ears, the examiner stated that the Veteran’s current hearing loss occurred after separation from military service and was as likely as not from the Veteran’s work as a pilot. Although the Veteran is competent to report his observed symptoms, he is a lay person without appropriate medical training and expertise, and thus, is not competent to make an etiological conclusion regarding the cause of his observed symptoms. The June 2015 VA examiner is a medical expert who was able to review the evidence of record and personally examined the Veteran while providing a reasoned rationale for her conclusions, which is consistent with the Veteran’s own reports that his hearing loss developed gradually over an extended period of time. As such, the VA examiner’s opinion is more probative than the lay statements of the Veteran. Based on the findings of the VA examiner, supported by the evidence of the Veteran’s normal hearing on separation examination, the weight of the evidence is against a finding of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. As to presumptive service connection, the evidence does not reflect that the Veteran’s present disability was manifested to a compensable level within one year of service discharge. The Veteran’s service treatment records are absent of complaints of hearing loss during active duty. Service treatment records do not document any complaints of hearing loss during service and audiometry testing on separation examination showed normal hearing bilaterally. There is also no competent evidence showing that the Veteran complained of or was treated for hearing loss within one year following discharge. As such, the Veteran may not be awarded service connection on a presumptive basis based on a chronic disease of sensorineural hearing loss. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim for service connection, the benefit of the doubt doctrine is not for application, and the Veteran’s claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. A. P. SIMPSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Wonderling, Associate 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.