Citation Nr: 21010111 Decision Date: 02/24/21 Archive Date: 02/24/21 DOCKET NO. 17-48 783 DATE: February 24, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT Tinnitus had its onset during active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran was a member of the United States Marine Corps Reserves from June 1987 to June 1995, with a period of active duty from December 1990 to April 1991. Personnel records also document repeated active and inactive duty training periods as well. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2017 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran testified at a February 2021 hearing at the RO held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) via videoconference. This decision is being rendered prior to the production of a transcript of that hearing; given the favorable outcome, the Veteran is not prejudiced. Service connection will be granted if it is shown that the Veteran suffers from a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, during active military service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Disorders diagnosed after discharge will still be service connected if all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d); see also Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039, 1043 (Fed. Cir. 1994). Importantly, “active military service” includes periods of active duty for training during which a Veteran is disabled by injury. 38 C.F.R. § 3.6(a). Some chronic diseases may be presumed to have been incurred in service, if they become manifest to a degree of ten percent or more within the applicable presumptive period. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101(3), 1112(a); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a), 3.309(a). For those listed chronic conditions, a showing of continuity of symptoms affords an alternative route to service connection. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b); Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F. 3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Tinnitus is a listed condition as an organic disease of the nervous system, with a presumptive period of one year following separation from service. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran stated that he was an electrician attached to a tank unit. He reported that he was constantly surrounded by extremely loud noises coming from the tank engines, and that he has had problems with ringing in his ears ever since. The Veteran’s DD-214 lists his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) as electrical equipment repairman with the Fourth Tank Battalion. The Board finds that the Veteran’s reports of his duties and noise exposure are credible as they are consistent with his MOS. Military noise exposure is established. A VA hearing loss and tinnitus examination was completed in January 2017. The Veteran reported recurrent tinnitus, indicating that it first onset in 1988, when he was at the rifle range. The examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran’s tinnitus was caused by or a result of military noise exposure. The examiner stated that upon review of the claims file, an October 1988 separation examination showed hearing within normal limits with no significant shifts from enlistment to separation aside from an improvement in the left ear. There was no evidence of acoustic trauma or verifiable noise injury. The examiner indicated that the Veteran did not participate in combat activity. However, it was noted that the Veteran’s current mild hearing loss in the left ear, which was evidenced during the audiological examination, is consistent with tinnitus. The Board finds that the opinion is inadequate; the rationale is lacking. The examiner fails to explain why audiometric findings are relevant to tinnitus, and does not address the facts of reported onset in service, and continuity since. Additionally, the examiner did not address allegations of worsening following further noise exposure in a tank unit. During the Board hearing, the Veteran stated that he did not have hearing protection while working in the motor pool at the tank unit. He indicated that he did not seek medical treatment for tinnitus while in-service, because reporting such problems while in service was discouraged. He further indicated that he continues to have daily ringing in his ears. He indicated at one point that his tinnitus had begun during his 1990-1991 active duty period, but clarified that onset was in 1988, but he noted a marked increase and worsening following his active duty. The competent and credible lay evidence reflected that the Veteran first experienced tinnitus in 1988 while at the firing range, that he also noticed tinnitus during his active duty service in the tank unit, and that it has continued ever since. Personnel records show active duty training from May to November 1988, and acoustic trauma at that time is consistent with the facts and circumstances of his Reserve service. It is qualifying active military service. The statements by the Veteran also amount to evidence of continuity of symptomatology which would warrant consideration of 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). The Board finds that the Veteran’s lay statements are sufficient to establish service connection for tinnitus. As such, the Board concludes that entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is warranted. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S.P. Faris 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.