Citation Nr: 21022860 Decision Date: 04/19/21 Archive Date: 04/19/21 DOCKET NO. 16-62 966 DATE: April 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is granted. FINDING OF FACT Bilateral hearing loss originated during active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.385. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from August 1968 to October 1976 and additional duty with the Naval Reserve. Service Connection for Bilateral Hearing Loss The Veteran asserts that service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted as the claimed disability originated during active as the result of his significant in service noise exposure as a Navy and Naval Reserve flight officer. He reported having been exposed to jet noise for 18 years while performing his duties as a navigator and flight instructor. Service connection for impaired hearing shall be established when the thresholds for any of the frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 Hertz are 40 decibels or more; or the thresholds for at least three of these frequencies are 26 decibels; or speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. The service personnel records state that the Veteran served as a naval flight officer aboard aircraft carriers, a navigator, a flight instructor, and a ground instructor. He retired from the Naval Reserve in April 1996. The service medical records do not refer to any hearing loss disability. A February 1972 treatment record states that the Veteran was seen for left ear fullness; echo; and “difficulty clearing” the ear. The service documentation does not show that the Veteran was provided with a Naval Reserve separation examination in 1996. The report of a September 2016 audiology examination conducted for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) states that the Veteran exhibited pure tone thresholds, in decibels, as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 15 15 45 55 60 LEFT 10 25 45 55 55 Speech audiometry found speech recognition ability of 88 percent in the right ear and of 82 percent in the left ear. The examiner noted that service records dated between September 1972 and December 1992 were reviewed. The examiner diagnosed bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The examiner concluded that “the hearing loss is less than likely than not caused by or a result of an event in military service.” While acknowledging that “there was a high probability for noise exposure due to his MOS,” the audiologist commented that “his hearing was within normal limits at separation.” The examiner did not indicate the date of the report of the “separation” examination to which she was referring. In the December 2016 Appeal to the Board, VA Form 9, the Veteran denied having received either a hearing test or physical evaluation at retirement from the Naval Reserve. The Veteran’s written statement is consistent with the service documentation of record. Because of the absence of documentation of a 1996 separation examination, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) finds that the September 2016 VA examination report is of limited probative value. The Board observes that the Veteran has been diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease and found by VA personnel to be medically unable to undergo further audiometric testing. A January 2021 audiological evaluation conducted for VA states that “records show normal hearing with no significant hearing changes during military and reserve service on exams from 1972-1992 and the Veteran had normal hearing at enlistment and separation and after separation.” The examiner did not note or otherwise address the fact that the Veteran was not provided audiometric testing or a separation examination at retirement from the Naval Reserve. Because of that deficiency, the Board finds that the evaluation is of essentially no probative value. (Continued on the next page) The evidence is in at least equipoise as to whether the diagnosed bilateral sensorineural hearing loss originated during active service. The Veteran was exposed to jet engine noise as a naval flight officer for over 18 years. VA has conceded the Veteran’s significant in service jet noise exposure. The report of the October 2016 VA audiological examination states that the Veteran was diagnosed with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss disability. That examination report is deficient for VA rating purposes. The Veteran has credibly asserted that hearing loss began in service and has continued since that time. Unfortunately, the Veteran is no longer medically able to undergo further audiological testing. Therefore, resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board concludes that service connection for bilateral hearing loss is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Harvey P. Roberts Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. T. Hutcheson, 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.