Citation Nr: 21005941 Decision Date: 02/02/21 Archive Date: 02/02/21 DOCKET NO. 17-33 183 DATE: February 2, 2021 ORDER Service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT A medical nexus between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis of a bilateral hearing loss disability have not been met, and the Veteran did not manifest a bilateral hearing loss disability within one year of separation from service; or continuity of symptomology since separation from service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1113; 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.304; 3.307; 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1995 to December 1997. This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeal (Board) on appeal from a May 2015 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter is being adjudicated under the legacy appellate framework. The Veteran testified at a personal hearing before the Board in August 2019, and a transcript of the hearing is of record. This matter was previously before the Board, and, in November 2019, the Board remanded this matter for further development. Further development in substantial compliance with the Board’s previous remand instructions has been completed. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. At issue is whether the Veteran is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is not entitled to service connection. In seeking VA disability compensation, a Veteran generally seeks to establish that a current disability results from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131. “Service connection” basically means that the facts, shown by evidence, establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Furthermore, service connection can be established through application of statutory presumptions, including for chronic diseases like diseases of the nervous system, when manifested to a compensable degree within a year of separation from service; or there is continuity of symptomology since separation from service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.385, disability due to impaired hearing, for the purposes of applying the law administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 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 (Hz) are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. The Veteran testified at a personal hearing before the Board in August 2019. The Veteran indicated that he had a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, and that he wears hearing aids. The Veteran reported military noise exposure while working as a mechanic on military vehicles. The Veteran also noted on particular instance where he was working on a particularly loud piece of machinery that caused his ears to begin to ring. The Veteran admitted to noise exposure while working as a civilian mechanic after separating from service, but the Veteran claimed that he was never exposed to as much noise exposure in civilian life as he was while he was working in the military. The Veteran also indicated that he did not seek treatment for hearing loss until approximately 2008. See Transcript. The Veteran underwent a survey of medical history upon entering a period of service. The Veteran denied having or ever having had ear trouble or hearing loss. The Veteran also underwent a contemporaneous medical examination, and the Veteran’s ears were evaluated as normal. The Veteran underwent an audiogram during the examination. The Veteran’s pure tone thresholds were as follows in decibels: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Right 10 5 15 5 5 Left 10 5 10 10 10 The Veteran’s service treatment records are silent for a diagnosis of or treatment for bilateral hearing loss. Nevertheless, the Veteran’s DD-214 indicates that the Veteran’s military occupational specialty was a heavy vehicle mechanic and thus consistent with military noise exposure from heavy equipment, and that the Veteran received a sharp shooter qualification decoration which is also consistent military noise exposure from gunfire. During a period of service, the Veteran underwent an audiogram in October 1995. The Veteran’s pure tone thresholds were as follows in decibels: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Right 15 10 10 5 0 Left 10 0 15 10 0 The Veteran underwent another in-service audiogram in November 1996. The Veteran’s pure tone thresholds were as follows in decibels: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Right 20 20 15 10 5 Left 30 20 25 15 20 The Veteran provided another survey of medical history upon separating from service. The Veteran denied having or ever having had ear trouble or hearing loss. The Veteran also underwent a contemporaneous medical examination, and the Veteran’s ears were evaluated as normal. The Veteran underwent an audiogram during the examination. The Veteran’s pure tone thresholds were as follows in decibels: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Right 15 5 10 5 0 Left 15 10 10 10 0 The record is silent for decades thereafter. The Veteran’s treatment records indicate that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of hearing loss and uses hearing aids. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in May 2015. The Veteran reported military noise exposure while working as a mechanic in the military. The Veteran also conceded civilian noise exposure while working as a civilian mechanic and recreational noise exposure while riding motorcycles. The Veteran’s average pure tone thresholds were 23 dB in the right ear and 24 dB in the left. The Veteran’s speech recognition score was 88 percent in the right ear and 84 percent in the left ear. The Veteran was diagnosed with bilateral hearing loss. The examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss was related to a period of service, because the Veteran’s audiometric results were normal both upon entering and separating from service. The Veteran’s pure tone thresholds were as follows in decibels: 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Right 15 25 10 20 35 Left 15 20 25 25 25 The Veteran was provided a medical opinion in July 2020. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss was less likely than not related to a period of service, because there was not a significant threshold shift during audiometric testing that occurred upon entrance and separation from service. The examiner further noted that pertinent medical literature indicated that there was not significance evidence that permanent noise-induced hearing loss can develop later in life long after the cessation of noise exposure. Although admitting that definitive studies on the matter had not been performed, the examiner indicated that what evidence that was available made it unlikely that the delayed onset of hearing loss could occur. The weight of the evidence indicates that the Veteran is not entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran has a current diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss, because a VA examination indicated that the Veteran’s speech recognition scores were less than 94 percent in each ear. The Veteran sustained military noise exposure, because the Veteran provided competent testimony indicating as much; and that testimony is corroborated by the documentation in the Veteran’s DD-214. Nevertheless, the evidence of record does not establish that a medical nexus exists between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis. A VA examiner observed that the Veteran’s threshold shifts are not consistent with sustaining hearing loss during a period of service, and the examiner cited to pertinent medical literature which indicated that the relationship between the onset of bilateral hearing loss after service and noise exposure during service was unlikely. Moreover, the record is silent for a positive medical opinion suggesting a medical nexus exists between an in-service incurrence and a current diagnosis. Finally, the Board notes that the record is silent for a diagnosis of bilateral hearing loss within one year of separation from service or continuity of symptomology since separation from service. Even in the Veteran’s own sworn testimony before the Board moreover, the Veteran reported that he did not seek treatment for bilateral hearing loss until approximately 2008; decades after separation form service. Here, the weight of the probative evidence of record simply fails to demonstrate that the Veteran is entitled to service connection for a bilateral hearing loss disability. Therefore, the evidence in this case is not so evenly balanced so as to allow application of the benefit-of-the-doubt rule as required by law and VA regulations. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. As such, entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss disability is denied. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Seaton 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.