Citation Nr: 21065375 Decision Date: 10/26/21 Archive Date: 10/26/21 DOCKET NO. 19-34 274 DATE: October 26, 2021 ORDER Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. Service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran was exposed to hazardous noise while on active duty. 2. The Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss for VA purposes is as likely as not attributable to in-service noise exposure. 3. The Veteran's current bilateral tinnitus was incurred while in service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. With resolution of reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been satisfied. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 1153, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.385 (2020). 2. With resolution of reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for tinnitus have been satisfied. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 1153, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from June 1983 to June 1987. Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131. Service connection may be granted for any injury or disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease or injury was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). 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. The Veteran has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss for VA purposes during the appeal period. As noted in the August 2018 VA examination audiological examination report, the Veteran's auditory threshold in the right ear at the 4000 Hertz range was over 40 decibels and in the left ear at the 3000 and 4000 Hertz ranges were over 40 decibels. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Additionally, in the March 2021 private audiogram report, the Veteran's auditory threshold in the left ear at the 3000 and 4000 Hertz ranges were over 40 decibels. Id.; Savage v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 259 (2011) (noting the Board may interpret results from a private audiometric graph, if it felt it had the expertise, and holding that the Board may not ignore such private audiometric test results that are of record). The Veteran also has a current diagnosis of tinnitus during the appeal period, as noted in the August 2018 VA examination report, March 2021 private audiogram report, and at the September 2021 Board hearing. Specifically, the Veteran informed the VA examiner that "ringing started in 1985 when stationed with tank battalion" and reported at the hearing that he had ringing in ears in March 1985. The Veteran's lay statements regarding the onset of tinnitus is competent as tinnitus is capable of lay observation. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). Next, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) conceded in the October 2019 statement of the case (SOC) that the Veteran's military occupational specialty (MOS) of ammunition technician has a high probability of noise exposure. As a result, the Board finds the element of an in-service occurrence has been met in this case. Next, review of the August 2018 VA examination report shows that after the in-person examination and review of the electronic claims file, the examiner concluded the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is not at least as likely caused by or a result of an event in military service. It was explained, in part, that no entrance hearing test from 1983 was available for review, a reference audiogram in June 1984 indicated normal hearing in both ears, and a hearing test in September 1986 also indicated normal hearing in both ears and no shift or change in hearing as compared to the thresholds in 1984. In contrast, the Board finds that review of the record shows the Veteran underwent a pre-induction examination in March 1983, a positive threshold shift in both ears between the March 1833 pre-induction and June 1987 separation examination reports, and some degree of impaired hearing in the left ear in the July 1985 reference audiogram. See Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 157 (1993) (holding that the threshold for normal hearing is from 0 to 20 decibels, and higher threshold levels indicate some degree of hearing loss). As a result, the Board finds that the rationale for the August 2018 VA medical opinion is inadequate because the examiner relied on an incomplete review of the Veteran's service treatment records; therefore, this medical opinion lacks probative value to show a nexus between the Veteran's current diagnoses of bilateral hearing loss for VA purposes and tinnitus and his in-service noise exposure. Nevertheless, review of the March 2021 private audiogram report shows that after the in-person examination, review of in-service audiogram reports, and consideration of the Veteran's consistent report of his noise exposure history during and since separation from service, the examiner concluded "[m]ore likely than not the tinnitus and hearing loss started during the service. The [V]eteran[']s [Military Occupational Specialty] showed high probability for noise, minimal hearing protection and minimal noise exposure outside of the service. Also, the [V]eteran was able to recall an event during the service that led to the tinnitus." The Board finds this opinion was based on an accurate factual history and there is no probative contrary medical opinion of record. As a result, the Board finds the element of a nexus between the Veteran's current diagnoses of bilateral hearing loss for VA purposes and tinnitus and his in-service noise exposure has been met in this case. For the reasons and bases discussed above and after resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection is warranted for bilateral hearing loss and for tinnitus on a direct basis. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. D. Martz Ames Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board T. Carter, 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.