Citation Nr: 21077421 Decision Date: 12/29/21 Archive Date: 12/29/21 DOCKET NO. 20-21 826 DATE: December 29, 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 Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to military noise exposure. 2. The Veteran's tinnitus is related to military noise exposure. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria to establish service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. 2. The criteria to establish service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the Army from July 1966 to June 1968. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2019 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran was afforded a travel Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in August 2021. A transcript of this hearing has been associated with the claims file. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service (nexus). Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may also be established with certain chronic diseases, such as sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus, based upon a legal presumption by showing that the disease manifested itself to a degree of 10 percent disabling or more within one year from the date of separation from service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309(a). In addition, service connection may also be established under 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(b), where a symptom of a chronic disease is noted in service without diagnosis in service or within one year from service, but chronicity is established by continuity of symptomatology after service. This is an alternative way to establish service connection for the specific chronic diseases listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309 a). See Walker v. Shinseki, 718 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss At the outset, the evidence shows that the Veteran has a current bilateral hearing loss disability for the purposes of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. According to the January 2019 VA examination report, the Veteran's puretone threshold testing revealed bilateral hearing loss as defined by 38 C.F.R. § 3.385, including speech recognition ability using the Maryland CNC Test measured to be 76 percent in the right ear and 84 percent in the left ear. The Veteran has consistently contended that this bilateral hearing loss is due to in-service noise exposure. The Veteran's DD-214 reflects that his military occupational specialty (MOS) was that of military policeman. This MOS is associated with a moderate probability of noise exposure. The Veteran stated that he had weapons training and was never administered hearing protection. He also testified that there was an in-service incident where someone fired a weapon behind him which left the Veteran with residual ringing in his ear. In-service noise exposure is conceded. See August 2021 Board hearing transcript. Service treatment records do not reveal complaints or notations pertaining to hearing loss. The Veteran's July 1966 entrance examination report and May 1968 separation examination report show audiograms which both show normal hearing bilaterally, even when converted to current ANSI standards, as noted by the January 2019 VA examiner. On the January 2019 VA hearing loss examination, the examiner considered the entrance and separation testing yielding normal hearing. Ultimately, it was concluded that because the Veteran had normal hearing upon separation an no significant threshold shift, that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's hearing loss was caused or a result of an in-service event. However, the Veteran's representative has argued that to draw a conclusion that there is no significant threshold shift at a frequency that is not tested can only be done through speculation which then leads to reasonable doubt in noting that puretone threshold testing was not done at 3000 Hz in the May 1968 separation examination report. During the August 2021 Board hearing, as noted above, the Veteran provided clarification regarding in-service noise exposure in that there was as in-service incident where someone fired a weapon behind him which left the Veteran with residual ringing in his ear. According to the August 2021 Board hearing transcript, the Veteran has had continuity of his symptoms since service which has worsened over time. Furthermore, the Veteran indicated that he did not have post-service noise exposure aside from running a lawn mower because he worked as an illustrator. Accordingly, the Veteran was exposed to hazardous noise while in-service. Throughout the period on appeal, he has contended that his in-service noise exposure is the cause of his current hearing loss. He recalled having continuity of symptoms since service. Based on the evidence of record, the Board finds that there is competent and credible evidence to establish onset of bilateral hearing loss in service. Resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Accordingly, service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. 2. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran has also claimed that he has experienced tinnitus symptoms which began in service. In the January 2019 VA examination report, the Veteran reported having bilateral constant tinnitus although the exact onset was unknown. The examiner stated that he could not provide a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's tinnitus without resorting to speculation and indicated that tinnitus is a symptom rather than an illness. As explained in detail above, during the August 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran recalled that he first experienced ringing in his ears in-service and it has since gotten worse. Tinnitus is a condition that may be diagnosed by its unique and readily identifiable features and the presence of the disorder is not a determination that is medical in nature and is capable of lay observation. Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). The Veteran has competently and credibly reported that he first experienced tinnitus during service and has continued to experience the same symptoms since that time. Resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for tinnitus is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 Cynthia M. Bruce Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Williams, 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.