Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded.

Citation Nr: A26069962 Decision Date: 07/30/26 Archive Date: 07/30/26 DOCKET NO. 220119-212078 DATE: July 30, 2026 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from June 1989 to June 1993. This case comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2021 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which denied service connection for bilateral hearing loss. In the January 2022 VA Form 10182, Notice of Disagreement, the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held on July 15, 2025. The transcript is of record. Based on the Veteran's docket selection, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the August 2021 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran, or his representative, at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801. However, because the Board is remanding the claim of bilateral hearing loss, any evidence the Board could not consider will be considered by the AOJ in the adjudication of that claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(c)(2)(ii). Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. The Veteran seeks service connection for bilateral hearing loss. He contends that this condition was caused by his in-service noise exposure, consisting of acoustic trauma from helicopters, galley noises, boiler room noises, mortars, grenades, machine guns, rifles, pistols, and shoulder-fired missiles during his military occupational specialty (MOS) as machine gunner. See June 2021 VA Form 21-526EZ, Application for Disability Compensation and Related Compensation Benefits; see also, June 2021, VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim. He further contends that during basic training he was exposed to noise when required to use weaponry. See June 2021, VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim. He contends that it was not always effective to wear hearing protection routinely or correctly due to the poor fitting of the hearing protection. Id. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 303(a). It may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all evidence establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 303(d). Generally, to establish service connection, a claimant must demonstrate: (1) the existence of a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; see Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Certain chronic diseases will be presumed related to service, and service connected, if they were diagnosed as such in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). If a chronic disease was not diagnosed in service but manifested to a compensable degree within a designated time period following separation from service (usually one year), then it is presumed to have been incurred or aggravated in service, despite a lack of in-service treatment or diagnosis. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(3), 3.309(a). Lastly, if there is a current chronic disease that was not diagnosed as such in service, service connection may be established if there is evidence of continuity of symptomatology since service, with no intervening cause. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(b), 3.309(a). For VA compensation purposes, impaired hearing is considered a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz (Hz) is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of the frequencies 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz 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. The threshold for normal hearing is from zero to 20 decibels, and higher threshold levels indicate some degree of hearing loss, while not necessarily rising to the level of a hearing loss disability to qualify for VA compensation. See Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155 (1993). The Board notes that the Veteran's entry and separation audiograms both indicate normal hearing. Compare June 24, 1988 audiometer with May 3, 1993 audiometer. In this case, the RO made a favorable finding with respect to the second element of service connection, which is binding on the Board. The RO found that a qualifying event, injury, or disease had its onset during military service, based on the Veteran's exposure to hazardous noise in his MOS of machine gunner. See August 2021 rating decision. While the second element of service connection has been conceded by the VA, the RO did not make a favorable finding with respect to a current diagnosis or nexus. Id. A VA examination was conducted in August 2021. Although puretone thresholds in decibels were recorded, with each decibel being over 40 bilaterally, the examiner did not diagnose the Veteran with hearing loss as she concluded that the puretone tests results were "not valid for rating purposes (not indicative of organic hearing loss)." See August 2021 Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ). The examiner explained that the "Veteran demonstrated indicators of non-organic hearing loss including ability to understand conversational speech during in-person examination without the use of visual cues. Essentially flat bilateral Hearing loss which is not consistent with a noise induced history. AC and SRT are not in agreement in either ear. CNT bone scores due to Grossly elevated air scores in both ears." Id. The Board finds this examination and opinion to be inadequate for the purposes of adjudication of the Veteran's claim, as no diagnosis was provided; however, the examiner acknowledged that the Veteran's hearing impacts his ordinary life and that the Veteran's MOS had a high probability of hazardous noise exposure, in addition to his combat deployment to Kuwait and Somalia. While the examiner determined that the puretone test results were not valid for rating purposes, additional testing should have been completed in order to attempt to obtain accurate results. Where VA provides the Veteran with an examination in a service connection claim, the examination must be adequate. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). Here, the RO's failure to obtain an adequate medical examination constitutes a pre-decisional duty to assist error, which requires remand to correct under the AMA. The Veteran should be afforded a new medical examination and opinion to determine the nature and etiology of any bilateral hearing loss. 38 C.F.R. § 20.802. The Board notes that since a private medical examination and opinion was not submitted by the Veteran in support of his claim, and the VA examination is inadequate to provide a current diagnosis of hearing loss, there is no basis on which to grant the claim at this time. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. In remanding this matter, the Board makes no finding, implicit or otherwise, as to the credibility of the Veteran's assertions. Neither the Veteran's credibility nor lack thereof should be presumed in this remand. 2. Obtain a new VA examination and opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed bilateral hearing loss disorder. The Veteran's entire claims file must be made available to the examiner, including a copy of this remand order. After reviewing the claims file and performing an examination, the examiner should opine on the following: (a.) Identify/diagnose any hearing loss disorder that presently exists or that has existed during the period on appeal. A specific finding should be made as to whether the Veteran currently has or has had a hearing loss disability for VA purposes. If the examiner is again unable to obtain valid puretone test results for rating purposes, the examiner must address whether it is impossible to accurately obtain puretone test results for this Veteran or whether referral to another specialist is necessary. (b.) Whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's right and/or left ear hearing loss disorder is etiologically related to the conceded in-service noise exposure. (Continued on next page) A complete rationale must be provided for the opinion and any resort to speculation must be explained. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Riccio, C., Associate Attorney 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.