Citation Nr: 21003116 Decision Date: 01/19/21 Archive Date: 01/19/21 DOCKET NO. 17-27 765 DATE: January 19, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s tinnitus is etiologically related to his service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from February 1969 to January 1972. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2016 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Decatur, Georgia. In September 2020, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the claims file. Service Connection Service connection is granted for any current disability that is the result of a disease contracted or an injury sustained while on active duty service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (a). Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (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, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Certain chronic diseases will be presumed related to service, absent an intercurrent cause, if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service (or within an applicable presumptive period) with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013). 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran contends that his tinnitus is related to service. He testified that during basic training, a grenade exploded within a few feet from where he was practicing. He described it as extremely loud and stated that he could not hear for several days following the explosion. Subsequently, he testified, he remembers his ears ringing and making a “whooshing” noise. In addition, he stated that participating in target practice with rifles would trigger the ringing in his ears. He stated that the ringing has continued intermittently since that time. As he is competent to describe the symptoms of tinnitus, and tinnitus is a disease which is capable of self-diagnosis, the Board finds that he has tinnitus and the first element is met. He is competent to testify on factual matters of which he has first-hand knowledge. Washington v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 362 (2005). The Veteran has a current disability with reported onset during service. He underwent a VA examination in April 2016, wherein he was formally diagnosed with tinnitus. The Veteran reported that he noticed his tinnitus in service, and the tinnitus is intermittent. The examiner stated that it is less likely than not (less than 50 percent probability) a symptom associated with the Veteran’s hearing loss or caused by or a result of acoustic trauma. The Board finds that the above examination, within its limited rationale, incorrectly relies on a lack of significant changes in hearing to formulate the basis of an opinion on tinnitus. Additionally, the rationale fails to consider the Veteran’s credible reports of noise exposure and symptoms for tinnitus. As such, the Veteran’s competent and credible testimony regarding onset of tinnitus in service is more probative. The claim is granted on this basis. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS FOR REMAND 2. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. The Veteran contends that his bilateral hearing loss is related to service. He underwent a VA examination in April 2016, which showed significant bilateral hearing loss. The examiner reasoned that the Veteran’s enlistment hearing test in 1968 showed normal hearing and the discharge test in 1971 showed normal hearing with no significant threshold changes in hearing. The Board regrets the further delay but find that a remand is necessary in this appeal to afford the Veteran the greatest possible consideration. Here, the VA examination of record is inadequate because it relied on a lack of threshold shift during service and did not adequately address whether noise exposure in service or other symptomatology in service could have led to the current disabilities. Therefore, a remand is required to obtain an adequate examination with an adequate opinion. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Update VA treatment records. 2. After completing directive #1, schedule the Veteran for an examination with an audiologist with an opinion to determine the nature and etiology of his bilateral hearing loss. Service connection is in effect for tinnitus. The examiner should opine on the following: Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is related to his service, to include noise exposure? The examiner should address the Veteran’s reports of in-service noise exposure, to include a grenade explosion and firing weapons during basic training. The examiner is reminded that a lack of threshold shift, by itself, is insufficient rationale to support any conclusion reached. Nathaniel J. Doan Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Wilson, 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.