Citation Nr: 21062772 Decision Date: 10/12/21 Archive Date: 10/12/21 DOCKET NO. 19-00 518 DATE: October 12, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The record evidence shows that the Veteran served in combat in the Republic of Vietnam; thus, his in-service exposure to significant acoustic trauma is conceded. 2. The record evidence shows that the Veteran has reported consistently that he experienced bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus since his in-service exposure to significant acoustic trauma while in combat in Vietnam. 3. The record evidence shows that the Veteran currently experiences bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. 4. The record evidence reasonably supports finding that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to active service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1154, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.385 (2020). 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1154, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304, 3.385 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active service from March 1964 to March 1965, including in combat in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2017 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Los Angeles, California, which denied the currently appealed claims. A virtual Board hearing was held in June 2021 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge and a copy of the hearing transcript has been added to the record. The Board finds that the evidence reasonably supports granting the Veteran's claims of service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. He essentially contends that he incurred both of these disabilities during active service, specifically as a result of in-service exposure to significant acoustic trauma while in combat in Vietnam. The record evidence reasonably supports these assertions. The Board notes initially that it is undisputed that the Veteran was exposed to significant acoustic trauma while in combat in Vietnam. His available service personnel records (DD Form 214) show that his military occupational specialty (MOS) was light weapons infantryman and he was awarded the Combat Infantryman's Badge (CIB). It also is undisputed that he experiences current disability due to bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. The record evidence shows that, on VA hearing loss and tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) in January 2017, the Veteran's pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 50 55 70 75 85 LEFT 50 55 70 75 75 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 96 percent in each ear. The VA examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to active service. The rationale for this opinion was based on a review of the claims file which showed no reports of hearing loss during service and no positive threshold shifts. This examiner stated that the Veteran reported that he initially experienced tinnitus in 1967-1968 after his separation from service while working in a factory. The Veteran also reported that his tinnitus currently was constant and bilateral. The VA examiner opined that it was at least as likely as not that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to his bilateral hearing loss. The rationale for this opinion was that tinnitus is a known symptom of hearing loss. The diagnoses were bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus. The Veteran testified at his June 2021 virtual Board hearing that he was exposed to significant acoustic trauma while in combat in Vietnam. He also testified that he was left alone during the January 2017 VA examination because the audiologist conducting the testing left the examination room while he was undergoing testing and asserted that this examination was inadequate. He testified further that, following his service separation, he had not worked in a part of the factory where there was significant noise exposure so he did not understand why the January 2017 VA examiner attributed his tinnitus to this post-service job. He testified further that he experienced bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus (which he described as ringing in his ears) continuously since his in-service exposure to significant acoustic trauma while serving in combat in Vietnam. Consistent with the Veteran's assertions, the record supports finding that his bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are related to service. It is undisputed that he was exposed to acoustic trauma while serving in combat in Vietnam and currently experiences disability due to bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. Although the Board recognizes that the January 2017 VA examiner provided a negative medical nexus opinion, the rationale for this opinion is inadequate. The absence of contemporaneous records does not preclude granting service connection for a claimed disability. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (finding lack of contemporaneous medical records does not serve as an "absolute bar" to the service connection claim); Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007) ("Board may not reject as not credible any uncorroborated statements merely because the contemporaneous medical evidence is silent as to complaints or treatment for the relevant condition or symptoms"). Because the January 2017 VA examiner found the lack of reports of hearing loss during service to be persuasive support for the negative nexus opinion between bilateral hearing loss and active service, this opinion is not entitled to probative value on the issue of whether bilateral hearing loss is related to service. The remaining medical evidence of record shows that the Veteran currently experiences bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus which may be related to active service, including as due to his conceded in-service exposure to significant acoustic trauma. In summary, and after resolving any reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus is warranted. R. FEINBERG Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Michael T. Osborne, 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.