Citation Nr: 21002691 Decision Date: 01/14/21 Archive Date: 01/14/21 DOCKET NO. 17-13 806 DATE: January 14, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Entitlement to service connection for an acoustic neuroma is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is etiologically related to his time in active service. 2. The Veteran’s acoustic neuroma is etiologically related to his time in active service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria to establish service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. 2. The criteria to establish service connection for an acoustic neuroma have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from October 1974 to December 1975. He then served with the National Guard until March 2004, with periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty training (INACDUTRA). This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2014 rating decision by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) which denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss, to include neuroma. A Board hearing was held in November 2019. A transcript is of record. This case was previously before the Board in January 2020 and remanded for additional development. The case has returned to the Board for further appellate proceedings. The Board finds there has been substantial compliance with its remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (where the remand orders of the Board are not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure substantial compliance). Service Connection A Veteran is entitled to VA disability compensation if there is a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in active service, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110. Generally, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an 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. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all of the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that a disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b), claims for chronic diseases enumerated in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 (a) benefit from a relaxed evidentiary standard. See Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Hearing loss has been interpreted as such a disease. To show a chronic disease in service, the record must contain a combination of manifestations sufficient to identify the disease entity, and sufficient observation to establish chronicity at the time. Continuity of symptomatology is required only where the condition noted during service or in the presumptive period is not, in fact, shown to be chronic or where the diagnosis of chronicity may be legitimately questioned. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (b). 1. Bilateral Hearing Loss The first two Shedden elements are met. The Veteran has a diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss. See October 2017 Dr. C.D. Medical Opinion. Additionally, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to loud noise in service as a Fire Protection Specialist. See DD-214. Therefore, the fundamental factual dispute in this case is whether the Veteran’s loud noise exposure in service caused his bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran submitted an October 2017 nexus statement from Dr. C.D. Dr. C.D. opined that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is most likely caused by or the result of noise exposure while in service. See October 2017 Dr. C.D. Medical Opinion. As the evidence for and the evidence against the Veteran’s claim is in relative equipoise, the Board affords the Veteran the benefit of the doubt and finds there is evidence of record establishing a link between the Veteran’s noise exposure in service and his bilateral hearing loss. Accordingly, the Board finds that a grant of service connection is warranted for bilateral hearing loss. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 2. Acoustic Neuroma The Veteran was diagnosed with a right-side acoustic neuroma in 2010. See July 2010 USF Health treatment notes. The Board has found that the Veteran was exposed to loud noise in service as discussed above. Therefore, the fundamental factual dispute in this case is whether the Veteran’s acoustic neuroma is related to his active service. The Veteran stated that he suffered from symptoms of clumsiness since service and those same symptoms have continued ever since. See Board Hearing Transcript at 7. The Veteran’s clumsiness has since been attributed to his acoustic neuroma. Specifically, the Veteran’s acoustic neuroma is noted to have a multitude of associated symptoms, one specifically noted as imbalance. See December 2011 Dr. C.D. Progress Notes. The Veteran is competent to testify as to facts he personally observed or described; this includes recalling what he personally felt, saw, smelled, heard, or tasted, including ringing in the ears. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994). The Veteran’s experience of clumsiness, or imbalance, is ascertainable by the senses. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). As discussed above, the Veteran is competent to testify as to his observed symptoms. The Board finds that the Veteran’s assertions are credible. Moreover, the Veteran’s clumsiness has since been attributed to his diagnosed acoustic neuroma. The Board has no reason to doubt the Veteran’s assertions that his symptoms of imbalance began during service and have since persisted to date. As such, service connection for an acoustic neuroma is warranted. DONNIE R. HACHEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Katie Poe, 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.