Citation Nr: 21008852 Decision Date: 02/18/21 Archive Date: 02/18/21 DOCKET NO. 20-15 213A DATE: February 18, 2021 ORDER Service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss is granted. Service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s current bilateral sensorineural hearing loss for VA purposes is related to his military noise exposure. 2. The Veteran’s current tinnitus began in and has continued since service. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.385. 2. The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from June 1964 to April 1966. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2018 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In January 2021, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The transcript is of record. Additionally, the Board notes that additional evidence was added to the record since the January 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case. As the Board is issuing a full grant of the Veteran’s claim, there is no need to discuss the lack of a waiver of the Agency of Original Jurisdiction review since it is not prejudicial to the Veteran. Service Connection Service connection will be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Where a disease is first diagnosed after discharge, service connection will be granted when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes it was incurred in active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1113(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.30(d). Service connection requires 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 condition incurred or aggravated by service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran is competent to report symptoms and experiences observable by his senses. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a). In relevant part, 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) requires that VA give “due consideration” to “all pertinent medical and lay evidence” in evaluating a claim for disability benefits. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009). A nexus between a current disability and an in-service injury or event may be established by evidence of continuity of symptomatology, if the condition is a chronic disease enumerated under 38 U.S.C. § 1101. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338-40 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus are considered organic diseases of the nervous system, and as such are enumerated chronic diseases. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112; Memorandum, Characterization of High Frequency Sensorineural Hearing Loss, Under Secretary for Health, October 4, 1995; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. The auditory threshold for normal hearing is from 0 to 20 decibels, and higher threshold levels indicate some degree of hearing loss. Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 157 (1993). Impaired hearing is considered a disability for VA purposes when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; when the auditory thresholds for at least three of these frequencies 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. It is not necessary to meet these criteria for a hearing loss disability during service to warrant service connection. Ledford v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 87 (1992). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any material issue, or the evidence is in relative equipoise, all reasonable doubt will be resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 1. Service connection for bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The Veteran contends service connection for bilateral hearing loss. Specifically, the Veteran testified that while in-service, he was exposed to unprotected hazardous noise from artillery and guns firing. See 1/15/2021 Hearing Transcript, at pages 4 and 6. A June 2018 VA examination shows that the Veteran has a bilateral sensorineural hearing loss disability for VA purposes per 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The report reflects diagnoses of sensorineural hearing loss, bilaterally. See 6/12/2018 C&P Examination. As mentioned above, the Veteran asserts that his hearing loss is related to unprotected exposure to hazardous noise from artillery weapons. Military records indicate that the Veteran’s military occupational specialty (MOS) was field artillery. See 1/29/1973 Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. Regarding the in-service incident, the Veteran asserted that his current hearing loss and tinnitus were the adverse effects which resulted due to continued in-service exposure to artillery and guns firing as part of his MOS. Specifically, the Veteran asserted that he was in AIT in Fort Knox, he was standing between two tanks, and one went off. Additionally, he testified that his disabilities began while in-service and worsened post-service. See 1/15/2021 Hearing Transcript, at pages 5, 7, and 9; see also 7/24/2020 FOIA/Privacy Act Request; 5/24/2019 NOD, at page 3. The Veteran’s reported in-service incident could not be verified since the Veteran stated that he did not report it. See 5/24/2019 NOD, at page 3. However, the Veteran’s reports of military noise exposure are consistent with his MOS. Based on these reports and the Veteran’s MOS in field artillery, the Board finds exposure to hazardous noise in service to be consistent with the places, types, and circumstances of such service. Exposure to hazardous noise in service is established. The June 2018 VA examiner opined that the Veteran bilateral hearing loss is less likely than not related to military noise exposure. As rationale, the examiner cited that the Veteran’s hearing was normal upon separation and that the service treatment records did not show complaints or treatment for hearing loss. See 6/12/2018 C&P Examination. However, the VA examiner did not consider the above-mentioned statements from the Veteran, which the Board deems credible. Based on the above, and resolving doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that the Veteran’s bilateral sensorineural hearing loss began and has continued since service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b), 3.309. Service connection for bilateral hearing loss is therefore warranted. 2. Service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran contends that his tinnitus is related to the above-discussed military noise exposure. Additionally, the Veteran has consistently stated that his tinnitus symptoms started in and have continued since service. See 1/15/2021 Hearing Transcript, at page 6; see also 5/24/2019 NOD. The Veteran is competent to report tinnitus, to include its onset, and the Board also finds the Veteran’s statements in this regard to be credible. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2003) (“ringing in the ears is capable of lay observation”). The June 2018 VA examiner stated that a medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran’s tinnitus could not be provided without resorting to speculation since there is no documentation of tinnitus in the Veteran’s service treatment records. See 6/12/2018 C&P Examination. The examiner’s statement, however, do not show adequate consideration of the above-mentioned Veteran’s reports of continuous tinnitus symptoms since service. Further, insofar as this opinion relied on the absence of reported tinnitus symptoms at separation, it is inadequate and lacks probative value. Additionally, there is no evidence to contradict the Veteran’s report of symptoms since service. In sum, resolving any doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that there has been continuity of symptomatology (ringing in the ears) since service. Therefore, the criteria of service connection for tinnitus are met. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. Service connection for tinnitus is warranted. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Fuentes, Associate 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.