Citation Nr: 18143127 Decision Date: 10/18/18 Archive Date: 10/17/18 DOCKET NO. 14-43 161 DATE: October 18, 2018 ORDER Service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT Tinnitus is attributable to acoustic trauma in service. CONCLUSION OF LAW Tinnitus was incurred in wartime service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had multiple periods of active service during the Gulf War Era, to include from August 2006 to February 2007, from May 2009 to May 2010, from June 2010 to September 2010 and from September 2011 to December 2012. He seeks service connection for tinnitus, and in February 2017 provided testimony before the undersigned Veteran’s Law Judge on this matter. Service connection for tinnitus Service connection may be established for disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110. In general, to establish a right to compensation for a present disability, a Veteran must show: (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 disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service - the so-called “nexus” requirement. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). The Veteran, who served in the Army as outlined above, asserts that he has had ringing in his ears since his exposure to acoustic trauma while deployed to Afghanistan in 2011 and 2012. In his 2013 notice of disagreement, he described the circumstances: I worked in an enclosed area on a Cargo Inspection Lane and inspected nearly 500 trucks daily for bombs and the trucks never shut off when we doing the inspections. It was in the middle of a traffic circle in downtown Kabul. Not only did we have the noise from the trucks we were inspecting, but the noise from the traffic that was going by as well. We also had man gates that we had to open & close to allow the trucks in & out of the inspection area. The gates are 3 ton gates that were very nois[y]. After I would get off my shift my hearing would be muffled and I have a difficult time hearing specific tones. Since this deployment I have had constant ringing in my ears. I am a student and I find myself sitting in class and being unable to hear what the instructors are saying and I am having a hard time keeping up and I have to ask more questions or stay after & get instructions again without any other classroom noise going on. The Veteran reiterated the general substance of his contentions in his December 2014 substantive appeal as well as in his testimony before the undersigned. His DD 214 for the period from September 2011 to December 2012 reflects he had service in Kyrgyzstan, Afghanistan, and received imminent danger area pay. His military occupational specialty (MOS) is military police. The Veteran has a current diagnosis of tinnitus, and in any event, is competent to identify the existence of this disorder because it is capable of lay observation. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002). The Board concludes that while the Veteran’s tinnitus was not diagnosed during service, it was manifest in service, and there has been continuity of the same symptomatology since service that ended in December 2012. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303(b), 3.307, 3.309(a). While the Veteran did not actually complain of tinnitus or ringing in the ears during active service, it is accepted that he had exposure to acoustic trauma as described by him during with regard to his 2011-2012 service in Afghanistan, consistent with his MOS. He has credibly reported that he first noted it in service after exposure to the aforementioned truck and traffic noise. As ringing in the ears is capable of lay observation, and his statements are credible and entitled to probative weight because they are internally consistent and consistent with other evidence of record, continuity of symptomatology is established. (Continued on the next page)   The Board acknowledges that the AOJ has cited to a VA examiner’s observation that he denied ringing in my ears in a 2010 post-deployment questionnaire. There is conflicting medical opinion evidence as to the etiology of the Veteran’s tinnitus. Again, though, tinnitus is capable of lay observation and this Veteran dates the condition to a period in which he served in an area of imminent danger in Afghanistan as noted above. His statements as to continuity suffice in his case. He has satisfactorily explained that the tinnitus did not begin until his 2011-2012 deployment and continued since that time. The Board concludes that tinnitus has been present since that period of service. C. TRUEBA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Rippel, Counsel