Citation Nr: 21074599
Decision Date: 12/15/21	Archive Date: 12/15/21

DOCKET NO. 18-42 359
DATE: December 15, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, his bilateral hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss are met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from June 1999 to August 1999, from November 2001 to April 2002, and January 2003 to September 2005. 

This matter is on appeal from a September 2015 rating decision.  

In December 2021, the Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge.  

1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss.

The Veteran contends that his bilateral hearing loss developed due, to include combat noise exposure, such as gunfire and missiles.

The Board finds that the Veteran has current diagnoses of bilateral hearing loss and that it is related to in-service noise exposure.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).

A June 2015 VA examiner noted a high probability of in-service noise exposure but found that his hearing loss was not a result of service.  That VA examiner, however, does not appear to have considered the Veteran's credible reports as to chronicity. 

Given the Veteran's high probability of hazardous noise exposure, in conjunction with credible reports of chronicity, and giving the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, as well as, other supportive evidence specific to this Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted.

The appeal is granted.

 

 

H.M. WALKER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Lindio

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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.