Citation Nr: 20007348 Decision Date: 01/29/20 Archive Date: 01/28/20 DOCKET NO. 19-24 380 DATE: January 29, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT Affording the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, his tinnitus is causally related to military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1963 to August 1967. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran contends that his current tinnitus incurred during and was caused by exposure to hazardous noise during his active duty service. The Board concludes that the Veteran currently has 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). In a March 2010 statement, the Veteran said the aircraft noise he was exposed to during his military service was the loudest noise he had ever heard; rating it a ten out of ten. His occupational noise was rated asa six or seven out of ten. During an April 2013 VA audiological examination, the Veteran reported that he had intermittent tinnitus that began right after the service. The tinnitus occurs three to four times per week and then he won’t hear it for a while. The basis of the negative VA nexus opinion was that there were no significant threshold shifts demonstrated between active duty entrance and separation audiometric test results and that the Veteran had occupational and recreational noise exposure following service. The Veteran submitted a private opinion in December 2018 stating that the Veteran’s tinnitus began as a result of working around flight deck noise during his three plus years in service. Because tinnitus is “subjective,” its existence is generally determined by whether or not 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). The Board finds the Veteran credible with regard to his claim of incurrence of tinnitus in service and continuity of tinnitus since service. His statement that tinnitus began immediately following service and has continued since is competent, credible, and probative. Notwithstanding the negative April 2013 opinion, the Board finds that the record reasonably supports the claim. The evidence of record demonstrates that the Veteran currently has tinnitus; that his duties during service involved exposure to hazardous noise, and that he has experienced tinnitus since service. Accordingly, the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s tinnitus is etiologically related to his active service. The benefit of the doubt is resolved in the Veteran’s favor; service connection for tinnitus must be granted. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. G. Perkins, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.