Citation Nr: 20077552 Decision Date: 12/08/20 Archive Date: 12/08/20 DOCKET NO. 17-07 623 DATE: December 8, 2020 ORDER Service connection for headaches, to include on a secondary basis, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s current headaches disorder is not related to in-service headache complaints and was not caused or aggravated by his service-connected tinnitus. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for headaches have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1969 to July 1971. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2014 rating decision issued by a Regional Office (RO The Board remanded the matter in January 2019 for outstanding VA treatment records and an addendum VA medical opinion. The matter has returned to the Board and further remand is unnecessary. The Veteran seeks service connection for headaches on the basis that they are related to falling off a tank in service. In the alternative, he contends that his headaches are secondary to his service-connected tinnitus. The Board finds, however, that the evidence weighs against service connection on both bases. The Veteran’s service treatment records are associated with the claims file and appear to be complete. In December 1969, the Veteran sought treatment for ringing in his ears after firing a loud gun. He reported that when his ears ring, he gets a headache. In February 1970, the Veteran sought treatment for migraines. He reported a history of one other migrainous event but did not mention tinnitus or a head injury, and he was diagnosed with headaches. At separation, his examination was normal, and he reported that he was in good health. Post-service medical records do not show subsequent treatment for headaches until December 2013, when he established care at VA. At that time, he reported experiencing headaches since a head injury in service. He was afforded a VA headaches examination in June 2014 at which time he reported that his headaches onset approximately 10 years before or 2004. This contradicts the timeline he reported in December 2013. He underwent a brain MRI which did not suggest prior hemorrhage or hemosiderin deposition but showed mild senescent mineralization in the inferior basal ganglia. The examiner diagnosed him with muscle tension headaches and opined that there was no clear connection between tinnitus and headaches, despite his reported in-service temporal relation. Instead, he opined that the Veteran’s headaches disorder is condition independent of his tinnitus disability. Because the examiner did not address aggravation or direct service connection, the Board remanded the matter for an addendum medical opinion. In February 2020, after examination and review of the claims file, the VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s headaches are less likely than not aggravated by the service-connected tinnitus because neither the Veteran’s current statements nor his medical records show an association between the Veteran’s headaches symptoms and tinnitus symptoms. She specifically discussed the Veteran’s neurology records which mention neck symptoms but not tinnitus. She further opined that there is no direct relationship between service, to include the in-service headache complaints, and his current disorder. She noted that the Veterans current symptoms bear no similarity to those described in service, which were acute, transitory, and unrelated to neck pain, and a review of the records show that the current disorder onset many years after service. Another addendum opinion was obtained in June 2020, but the Board did not rely on it because the examiner noted that the Veteran reported no association with his headaches and tinnitus in the past. While it is possible the examiner was referencing the Veteran’s recent statements, he did not make such a distinction, and the Veteran noted such an association in service. Accordingly, the Board did not consider this opinion probative. After review of the evidence, the Board finds that service connection is not warranted on a direct or secondary basis. The Veteran’s service treatment records show two complaints of headaches, without subsequent treatment, and that he separated from service without a headache-related diagnosis or complaint. His post-service records do not show treatment for headaches until 2013 and show that they are related to his nonservice-connected cervical spine condition rather than his tinnitus disability. Finally, the Board found the June 2014 and February 2020 medical opinions probative. Collectively, the two opinions adequately addressed both direct and secondary service connection theories and provided rationales and alternative etiologies. While the Veteran has contended that his headaches have persisted since service, his contentions are contradicted by his service treatment records, which show that he separated in good health, and conflicting statements made during the appeal period. In December 2013, he reported that his headaches onset in service and during the June 2014 examination, he reported that his condition onset in 2004. For that reasons, the Board did not find the Veteran’s contention that his headaches have persisted since service to be probative. Accordingly, the Board finds that the weight of the competent and credible evidence is against the claim for service connection, and the claim is denied. MICHELLE L. KANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Lavan, 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.