BVA9505511 DOCKET NO. 92-55 564 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Detroit, Michigan THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Brian J. Milmoe, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from February 1967 to October 1969. This case was most recently before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA or the Board ) in May 1994, when it was remanded to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Detroit, Michigan, so that additional development could be undertaken. Such development was to include the performance of a medical examination by a specialist in ear diseases, as well as an audiological evaluation. Upon return of the case to BVA, it is apparent that only the requested audiological study was conducted. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL It is contended by the veteran, in substance, that his currently existing sensorineural hearing loss of both ears is the result of inservice exposure to artillery fire. He specifically denies post-service exposure to excessive noise levels. Allegations are advanced, to the effect that an attending physician has attributed the veteran's hearing loss to excessive noise exposure. DECISION OF THE BOARD BVA, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of BVA that the records supports a grant of entitlement to service connection for a bilateral high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. A diminution in auditory acuity was initially shown in service at the time of the veteran's discharge from service. 2. While in military service, the veteran was exposed to excessive noise levels during the course of his duties as a cannon crewman in Vietnam. 3. Bilateral sensorineural hearing loss linked to acoustic trauma is shown during post-service years. CONCLUSION OF LAW Bilateral high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss was incurred in military service. 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 1110, 5107 (West 1991); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.385 (1994). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION At the outset, it is found that the veteran's claim for entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is "well- grounded" under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a), in that he has presented a claim that is plausible. As well, BVA is satisfied that, despite the RO's failure to undertake a medical examination by an ear specialist, the record is adequate for equitable disposition of the instant claim. Accordingly, VA has no further obligation to assist the veteran in the development of this case. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). The record reflects that the veteran's auditory acuity at the time of an enlistment medical examination in February 1967 was entirely within normal limits, and as such, the veteran is entitled to a presumption of soundness at service entrance regarding hearing loss. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1111 (West 1991). No pertinent history or complaints were made known at that time or during the remainder of the veteran's period of military service. No evidence is otherwise presented for adequate rebuttal of the aforementioned presumption of soundness. During the course of his military service, the veteran is not shown to have voiced complaints of hearing loss, nor is it demonstrated that he was treated therefor. Nevertheless, some diminution in auditory acuity was identified on the veteran's separation medical evaluation in October 1969. Audiometer testing showed, in part, the following results: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 5 15 25 30 15 LEFT 5 15 25 30 15 No physical profile was assigned for hearing impairment, despite the elevations at the 2000 and 3000 Hertz levels. Upon the veteran's discharge from service, a Department of Defense Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, was prepared, wherein it was noted that the veteran's last duty assignment had been with a field artillery unit in Vietnam and that his military specialty, coded 13B1P, was that of a cannon crewman. After service, the veteran is shown to have been evaluated by a private physician in August 1991, when he complained of a longstanding hearing loss of both ears, worse of the left. It was recorded for clinical purposes that there had been noise exposure in service due to his assignment to an artillery unit. Clinical evaluation was productive of findings culminating in a diagnostic impression of an asymmetrical hearing loss. Audiometry at that time revealed a moderate high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss of the right ear and a severe high- frequency sensorineural hearing loss of the left ear. The configuration was later interpreted by a private audiologist and confirmed by the physician to be indicative of hearing loss due to noise exposure. Audiological examination by VA in September 1994 revealed a moderate high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss of both ears, worse on the left. The pure tone air conduction threshold at the 4000 Hertz level in the right ear was 45 decibels; pure tone thresholds for the 3000 and 4000 Hertz levels of the left ear were each at 75 decibels. The presence of a diminution in auditory acuity during service is demonstrated by the record, as is the current existence of a moderate sensorineural hearing loss of both ears, meeting the criteria of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385, as amended December 27, 1994. Acoustic trauma in service is conceded by virtue of the veteran's military occupational specialty as a cannon crewman in the field artillery. Notice is also taken of the link established by medical evidence between the veteran's bilateral hearing loss and noise exposure. Finally, the veteran's statements regarding a longstanding hearing loss of both ears and a lack of post-service exposure to excessive noise are deemed to be credible, in the absence of salient evidence specifically challenging the truth of those statements. Accordingly, and with resolution of reasonable doubt in favor of the veteran, it is the BVA's conclusion that the record supports a grant of service connection for bilateral high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107 (West 1991). ORDER Service connection for a bilateral high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss is granted. ALBERT D. TUTERA Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991), a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.