Citation Nr: 18155015 Decision Date: 12/03/18 Archive Date: 12/03/18 DOCKET NO. 17-40 496 DATE: December 3, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. FINDING OF FACT Competent and credible evidence indicates the Veteran’s current tinnitus began during service and has continued to the present time. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for establishing service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C §§ 1101, 1110, 1112, 1131, 1137, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1958 to March 1967. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a March 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2018, the Veteran testified at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board). A transcript of the hearing is of record. This appeal has been advanced on the Board’s docket pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7107(a)(2) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2018). 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. At the November 2018 Board hearing, the Veteran testified he had ringing and buzzing in his ears during service and that it has continued to the present time. He attributed this condition to in-service acoustic exposure as a Navy pipefitter in the boiler room and loading guns. See October 2014, November 2015 and January 2016 VA treatment records. Service connection may be established for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. When a condition may be diagnosed by its unique and readily identifiable features, as is the case with tinnitus, the presence of the disorder is not a determination “medical in nature,” and is capable of lay observation. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 305 (2007). When a claim involves a diagnosis based on purely subjective complaints, the Board is within its province to weigh the Veteran’s testimony and determine whether it supports a finding of service incurrence and continued symptoms since service. If it does, such testimony is sufficient to establish service connection. Id. The Board finds the Veteran’s statements that his tinnitus began during service and has continued since to be competent and credible. In light of the evidence of record, the Board finds the competent and credible evidence is at least in equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s tinnitus arose in service and has continued to the present time. Accordingly, resolving all doubt in the Veteran’s favor, service connection for tinnitus is warranted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. REASONS FOR REMAND 2. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. VA treatment records, including those in November 2015 and January 2016, suggest the Veteran may have a current bilateral hearing loss disability and the Veteran has alleged acoustic trauma in service. Accordingly, a VA examination and opinion is needed. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of all medical care providers who have treated him for hearing loss. After securing the necessary releases, request any relevant records identified that are not duplicates of those associated with the claims file. In addition, obtain updated VA treatment records. If any requested records are unavailable, the Veteran should be notified of such. 2. After records development is completed, schedule the Veteran for a VA audiology examination to address his claim for service connection for bilateral hearing loss. The claims file must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. All indicated tests should be conducted and the results reported. Following review of the claims file, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that a current hearing loss disability is related to service? Please explain why or why not, to include addressing why the current bilateral hearing loss is/is not a delayed response to in-service noise exposure. K. A, BANFIELD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. C. Birder, Associate Counsel