Citation Nr: 18149041 Decision Date: 11/05/18 Archive Date: 11/08/18 DOCKET NO. 15-45 549 DATE: November 5, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his tinnitus is at least as likely as not related to active duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110 1112, 1113, 1154 (a), 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 (b), 3.309 (a). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from September of 1977 to June of 1982. The Veteran served in the Reserves from July 1982 to December 2001, during which time he was called up for active duty from September of 1990 to June of 1991. The Veteran testified before the Board at a hearing in May 2018. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran is claiming entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. He asserted in a hearing before the Board that his tinnitus is related to exposure to helicopters and large trucks in the motor pool due to his military occupational specialty of transportation and logistics. Specifically, under the relevant laws and regulations, 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, 1131. Generally, the evidence 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. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Certain chronic diseases, including tinnitus, are subject to presumptive service connection although not otherwise established as incurred in or aggravated by service if manifested to a compensable degree within one year from separation from service even though there is no evidence of such disease during the period of service. This presumption is rebuttable by affirmative evidence to the contrary. 38 U.S.C. 1112, 1113; 38 C.F.R. 3.307 (a)(3), 3.309(a). Moreover, for such chronic diseases, an alternative method of establishing the second and third Shedden element is through a demonstration of continuity of symptomatology if the disability claimed qualifies as a chronic disease listed in 38 C.F.R. 3.309 (a); See 38 C.F.R. 3.303 (b); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2014). VA must give due consideration to all pertinent medical and lay evidence in a case where a veteran is seeking service connection. 38 U.S.C. § 1154 (a). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b). Based on the evidence of record, the Board determines that service connection is warranted for tinnitus. Initially, the Board notes that the Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) do not exhibit complaints of or evidence of tinnitus. During his entrance and exit examinations, there are also no indications of tinnitus. In October 2013, twenty-two years after his discharge from active duty, the first evidence of tinnitus is noted in his VA treatment records. In this case, a hearing was held before the Board in which the Veteran provided competent and credible testimony regarding his in-service incurrence of tinnitus, as well as continuity of symptomatology. The Veteran testified that as part of his military occupational specialty he worked in transportation and logistics in the motor pool. This testimony is corroborated by his DD-214, which lists his military occupational specialty as Transportation Management Officer and Assistant Logistics and Maintenance Officer. Specifically, the Veteran testified that he refueled helicopters while training under wartime conditions. He was often required to refuel helicopters with the engines on and blades rotating, which created a high-volume noise. He was not always able or allowed to wear hearing protection while completing this task. This task was part of his regular duties while on active duty in both tours. The Veteran testified that working around helicopters is when he first noticed tinnitus symptoms, but he did not understand what it was. He also testified that his tinnitus has been constant with no breaks since the onset during active duty in approximately the late 1970’s to early 1980’s. The Veteran further testified that after active duty he worked in an office environment performing administrative work until age 60. This credible and competent evidence demonstrates the in-service incurrence of the chronic disease of tinnitus while serving on active duty as he worked near loud helicopters causing acoustic trauma. The Board finds that this evidence satisfies the 38 C.F.R. 3.309(a) presumption for service connection as his tinnitus manifested during a period of active duty. Further, the Veteran’s credible and competent testimony also satisfies the 38 C.F.R. 3.303 (b) requirement regarding the continuity of symptomology, showing constant tinnitus from the late 1970’s to the present with no break in symptoms. There is also no evidence of intercurrent causes of tinnitus as the Veteran’s provided testimony that his work outside of the military consisted only of administrative office work. Further credible and probative evidence was provided by the Veteran’s treating physician, who submitted a medical opinion in May 2014 stating that the Veteran’s tinnitus was likely due to his active duty service from working in the motor pool surrounded by loud noises. Additionally, the Veteran provided consistent statements in his June 2015 VA treatment records stating that his tinnitus began in approximately the early 1980’s, and that he hears ringing in his ears constantly, to the point that it is a distraction and it keeps him awake at night. The Board also acknowledges the negative opinion from the October 2014 VA examination, in which the examiner indicates that the Veteran’s tinnitus is not related to service. However, the examiner’s opinions related to tinnitus appear to be based solely on the fact that the medical records do not contain reports of tinnitus until after service. Therefore, given that the Veteran is competent and credible to report symptoms of tinnitus, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise.   Therefore, considering the totality of the evidence, the Board resolves all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran and grants service connection for tinnitus. 38 U.S.C. 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. 3.102. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Page-Nelson, Associate Counsel