Citation Nr: 21072572 Decision Date: 12/03/21 Archive Date: 12/03/21 DOCKET NO. 12-36 146 DATE: December 3, 2021 ORDER Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss had its onset in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1154(a), 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.385. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from June 1966 to May 1969, to include service in the Republic of Vietnam. In August 2018 and October 2020, the Board remanded the case for further development. The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss, which he contends began in service and has been recurrent since that time. All three elements of service connection are established by the competent and credible lay and medical evidence of record. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). First, the evidence shows that the Veteran has bilateral hearing loss for VA compensation purposes. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The Veteran reports that he was exposed to acoustic trauma, to include tanks, mortars, and personnel carriers, on a daily basis in connection with his military occupation specialty and while stationed in the Republic of Vietnam. See VA examination (November 2, 2009); VA Form 9 (January 31, 2013). Thus, the first two criteria have been met. Further, the competent and credible evidence of record shows that his current bilateral hearing loss began during service and has been recurrent since that time. The Veteran reported that he first noticed hearing loss during service and that it has gotten worse over the years. See, e.g., VA Form 9 (January 31, 2013). The Veteran is competent to report the onset and continuation of his hearing loss symptoms and the Board finds his account credible. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002); see also Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). The Board notes that in November 2009, a VA examiner opined that the Veteran's current bilateral hearing loss was not related to service. However, as explained in the October 2020 remand, the examiner's opinion is inadequate as it fails to adequately address favorable lay evidence of record. In April 2021, a VA examiner opined that while the Veteran was exposed to loud noise during service and his current hearing loss is likely related to loud noise exposure, it is not likely related to service as the May 1969 audiogram shows that his hearing was within normal range upon separation from service. The examiner went on to acknowledge that the left and right thresholds of 30 dB were 5dB outside the normal range, but found that such was not attributable to loud noise exposure as loud noise exposure causes hearing loss at higher frequencies. Here, the Board finds that the April 2021 VA examiner's opinion supports the Veteran's claim to the extent that it confirms that the Veteran's current hearing loss is related to loud noise exposure and that the Veteran was exposed to loud noise during service. Additionally, while the examiner stated that the Veteran's hearing was normal but on separation from service, it also states that some of the thresholds were outside of the normal range upon separation from service. Thus, regardless of the examiner's opinion that the in-service hearing loss was not noise-related, the examiner's opinion in fact shows that the Veteran's hearing loss exceeded the normal range during service. Indeed, the May 1969 audiogram reveals that six of the eight tested auditory thresholds were between 25 and 30 dBs. These results demonstrate that, at worst, the Veteran had some hearing loss, and at best, his in-service hearing loss was just shy of the criteria for a hearing loss disability for compensation purposes. To this end, the examiner's opinion supports the Veteran's assertion that his current hearing loss disability had its onset during service. Critically, the April 2021 examiner, like the November 2009 examiner, failed to address the Veteran's competent, credible report of recurrent hearing loss since service. Nonetheless, the Board finds that when coupled with the medical evidence indicating that the Veteran was exposed to loud noise during service, that he had some hearing loss upon separation from service, and that his current hearing loss is related to loud noise exposure, the Veteran's competent report of recurrent hearing loss since service sufficiently establishes that it is at least as likely as not that his current hearing loss had its onset during service. After resolving any doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that the Veteran's current hearing loss had its onset during service. In light of the foregoing, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is 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.