Citation Nr: 18142484 Decision Date: 10/17/18 Archive Date: 10/16/18 DOCKET NO. 16-31 559 DATE: October 17, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for bilateral tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his bilateral tinnitus began during active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for bilateral tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service, even if the disability was initially diagnosed after service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection will also be presumed for certain chronic diseases, including organic diseases of the nervous system such as tinnitus, if manifested to a compensable degree within one year after discharge from service. 38 U.S.C. § 1112; 38 C.F.R §§ 3.307, 3.309. This presumption, however, is rebuttable by probative evidence to the contrary. 38 U.S.C. § 1113. Alternatively, continuity of symptomatology may be established if a claimant can demonstrate: (1) that a condition was “noted” during service; (2) evidence of post-service continuity of the same symptomatology; and (3) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of a nexus between the present disability and the post-service symptomatology under 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b); Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (2007). Where a claimant asserts entitlement to a chronic condition but there is insufficient evidence of a chronic disease in service, he can establish service connection by demonstrating a continuity of symptomatology since service, but only if the chronic disease is listed under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a). Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1337-39 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of tinnitus that began during active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). The Veteran contends that his tinnitus is related to in-service noise exposure from firearms, artillery, aircraft and generators without hearing protection. His DD Form 214 reflects his military occupational specialty (MOS) was listed as a radio repairman and he was stationed in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam War era, which supports his statements of exposure to excessive noise during his active service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1154(b). Although the examiner in the March 2013 VA audiology examination found it was less likely than not that tinnitus was caused by or a result of military noise exposure, based on his report that his tinnitus began after service, the Board observes that the Veteran’s reported history of tinnitus indicates that he has had this disability since his discharge from active service. In the March 2013 VA examination, the Veteran reported his constant, bilateral tinnitus began in the late 1960s, after he left the military. His DD form 214 demonstrates he was discharged from active service in July 1967 and he reported in his June 2012 formal claim that his tinnitus began in 1968. Taken together, these records and his statements regarding the onset of his tinnitus and noise exposure during active service at the very least places the evidence in a state of relative equipoise as to whether tinnitus was incurred during the Veteran’s active service. In addition, the Veteran’s statements are competent and credible evidence that tinnitus continued since his discharge from active service. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002); Falzone v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 398 (1995); see also Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362, 368 (2005); see Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F. 3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Baldwin v. West, 13 Vet. App. 1 (1999); see also Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23 (2007). Therefore, the Board resolves all doubt in favor of the Veteran, and finds the probative evidence of record demonstrates he has a current diagnosis of tinnitus that had its onset during active service. Accordingly, service connection for bilateral tinnitus is warranted. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. 3.307, 3.309. See also 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-56 (1990). S. L. Kennedy Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Saira Spicknall, Counsel