Citation Nr: 21003948 Decision Date: 01/25/21 Archive Date: 01/25/21 DOCKET NO. 18-21 934 DATE: January 25, 2021 ORDER Service connection for hearing loss is denied. Service connection for tinnitus is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s current hearing loss disability did not have its onset within one year after separation from service and is not otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. 2. The Veteran’s current tinnitus did not have its onset within one year after separation from service and is not otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active duty from January 1968 to January 1971, to include combat service in the Republic of Vietnam and his decorations include the Combat Infantryman Badge. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in San Juan, Puerto Rico. In October 2018, the Board remanded the case for further development. The Veteran seeks service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus, which he attributes to exposure to loud noise during combat in the Republic of Vietnam. In essence, he maintains his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to his in-service, combat-related acoustic trauma, which is his in-service injury. Personnel records confirm that he served in Republic of Vietnam as a small weapons infantryman. See, e.g., DD Form 214. Certain chronic diseases will be presumed related to service, absent an intercurrent cause, if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service (or within an applicable presumptive period) with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Veteran has a current hearing loss disability for VA purposes as well as tinnitus, which are evinced by the September 2019 VA examination report. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Hearing loss and tinnitus are chronic disabilities under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a); Walker, 708 F.3d 1331. However, neither disability was not shown as chronic in service, did not manifest to a compensable degree within a presumptive period, and was not noted in service with attributable continuity of symptomatology. Service treatment records affirmatively show that the Veteran did not have a hearing loss disability during service. Post-service treatment records show that he initially presented with a one-year history of tinnitus and occasional hearing problems on June 3, 2011, at which time audiological testing affirmatively showed that he did not have a current hearing loss disability. The May 2015 VA audiological examination report also shows that the Veteran did not met the criteria for a current hearing loss disability. The September 2019 VA examination report shows that the Veteran met the criteria for a hearing loss disability. The Veteran told the examiner that his tinnitus had been present for approximately 10 years. Based on the foregoing, the Board finds that the lay and medical evidence of record affirmatively shows that the Veteran’s current hearing loss and tinnitus were not diagnosed until several decades after separation from service in 1971, and thus, outside of the applicable presumptive period. Accordingly, this case turns on whether the Veteran’s current hearing loss and tinnitus are related to the Veteran’s military service. Given the large gap between the Veteran’s in-service noise exposure and the onset of his current disabilities, the question of whether the two are related is medically complex. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). In a September 2019 opinion, a VA audiologist opined that the Veteran’s current hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to his military service. The examiner acknowledged that while loud noise exposure can damage structures of the inner ear, resulting in irreversible hearing loss, such hearing loss manifests during the noise exposure period. The examiner explains the medical literature does not support delayed onset hearing loss many years after exposure to loud noise. Therefore, as the Veteran did not begin to experience hearing loss until many years after service, the examiner opined that such is not related to his military service. The examiner also opined that the Veteran’s tinnitus is not related to his military service. The examiner explained that as tinnitus did not manifest until many years after service, it is most likely due to combined etiologies of post-service occupational and recreational noise exposure, or presbycusis effect due to progressive inner ear cell dysfunction. The Board finds that the September 2019 VA audiologist’s opinion is the most probative, competent evidence pertaining to the etiology of the Veteran’s current hearing loss and tinnitus. The preponderance of the evidence is against the claims for service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus; there is no doubt to be resolved; and service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus is not warranted. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Joshua R. Castillo, 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.