Citation Nr: 18143154 Decision Date: 10/18/18 Archive Date: 10/18/18 DOCKET NO. 15-06 847 DATE: October 18, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT The evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s tinnitus was caused by in-service noise exposure. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the Marine Corps from November 1999 to November 2003. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran contends that his tinnitus warrants service connection. He filed this claim in February 2013. Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Entitlement to direct service connection requires evidence of three elements: (1) the existence of a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship or nexus between the current disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during active service. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Additionally, for Veterans who have served 90 days or more of active service during a war period or after December 31, 1946, certain chronic disabilities, such as tinnitus (as an organic disease of the nervous system), are presumed to have been incurred in service if manifest to a compensable degree within one year of discharge from service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309. Alternatively, when a disease at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) is not shown to be chronic during service or the one-year presumptive period, service connection may also be established by showing continuity of symptomatology after service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). However, the use of continuity of symptoms to establish service connection is limited only to those diseases listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) and does not apply to other disabilities which might be considered chronic from a medical standpoint. See Walker, 708 F.3d 1331. Turning to the evidence, the Veteran served in the Marine Corps as a field artillery cannoneer. The Veteran’s service treatment records reflect that he underwent hearing conservation testing on several occasions as he was “routinely noise exposed.” In a December 2013 statement in support of his claim, the Veteran said that he did not have ringing in his ears until he was exposed to hazardous noise while working as a field artillery cannoneer. He said that he used the hearing protection provided to him, and that the tinnitus began while he was in the military. He said that it was infrequent and of short duration in the beginning, but the frequency and duration increased over the years he served in the military. The Veteran reported that his tinnitus had become more frequent and longer-lasting in the 2 to 3 years prior to this statement. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in December 2013. He reported that his recurrent tinnitus had its onset in 2000, that it occurred one to two times per month and lasted 10 to 15 seconds. The examiner noted that the Veteran’s service treatment records indicated that his hearing was not impaired during his service. The examiner concluded that the Veteran’s claimed tinnitus was less likely than not caused by military noise exposure because the audiometric configuration did not demonstrate a “classic acoustic noise notch pattern” consistent with repeated exposure to acoustic trauma, and his hearing sensitivity was within normal limits for both ears, and the frequency and duration described by the Veteran was not the type of tinnitus typically associated with repeated exposure to acoustic trauma. In a January 2015 response to the RO’s request for clarification, the examiner stated that tinnitus associated with repeated acoustic trauma is normally more frequent and lasts considerably longer. He said that the etiology of the Veteran’s tinnitus is unknown but less likely than not caused by military noise exposure. The first element of service connection is a current diagnosis. Because tinnitus is “subjective,” its existence is generally determined by if the Veteran claims to experience it. For VA purposes, tinnitus has been specifically found to be a disorder with symptoms that can be identified through lay observation alone. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). On December 2013 VA examination, the Veteran described a bilateral intermittent ringing in his ears. The Veteran has competently stated that he has tinnitus, and the Board finds his statements to be credible. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran has a current disability of tinnitus. The in-service Hearing Conservation Data reports indicate that the Veteran was “routinely noise exposed” during his service as a field artillery cannoneer. The Board finds that this noise exposure satisfies the second element of service connection. The Veteran also stated that his tinnitus had its onset during his military service and that he has continued to experience it with increasing frequency since his service. The December 2013 VA examination report holds limited weight of probative value because it did not consider that tinnitus had its onset during service and has continued since that time. The Board therefore resolves any reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor and finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise that the Veteran’s tinnitus began in service and has continued on a recurrent basis since his service. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b). Accordingly, the Board finds that service connection for tinnitus is warranted. M. SORISIO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. Dean, Associate Counsel