Citation Nr: 21012884
Decision Date: 03/05/21	Archive Date: 03/05/21

DOCKET NO. 16-14 846
DATE: March 5, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1983 to December 1985.

In September 2019, the Board issued a decision denying entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran appealed this decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). By a July 2020 Order, the Court, pursuant to a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR), vacated the Board's September 2019 decision and remanded the case for action consistent with the JMR.

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is remanded.

The record shows that at July 2015 VA examination, the Veteran stated he had tinnitus as long as he could remember but never paid attention to it. The audiologist concluded that the date or circumstance of the onset of his tinnitus was therefore unknown, and therefore opined that it was less likely than not related to service.  

At the March 2019 Board hearing, however, it was indicated the Veteran wished to clarify the time frame and circumstances when the tinnitus started.  He then stated it began in late 1983 or early 1984.  He described that he was talking to buddies around him and they were laughing about how their ears were ringing.  It was understood that this was called “artillery ears. But we didn’t pay no attention to it back then because, its like, everybody was always talking about it.”  

Since the Veteran had not provided a consistent history concerning the onset of his tinnitus, the Board did not consider his report at the hearing of its onset in service to be probative.  The JMR considered it necessary to have the Board address in a new decision, whether the Veteran’s testimony should be considered a clarification, after which the Board should determine whether the Veteran’s statements are credible.  

In addition to directing a re-analysis of the current record, the JMR raised a medical question for the Board to address.  This concerned whether the Veteran had delayed onset tinnitus.  To accomplish this, it will be necessary to obtain another medical opinion.  

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Ask the Veteran to identify any additional relevant records he wishes considered regarding this appeal, which records should be sought.

2. Obtain a VA medical opinion to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran's tinnitus. The claims file should be made available and reviewed by the opinion provider. If deemed necessary, afford the Veteran a VA examination. 

The opinion should address whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran has delayed onset tinnitus, arising from his in-service noise exposure as a soldier who served as a cannon crewmember in an artillery unit between 1983 and 1985.  

The reasons for the conclusion expressed should be fully explained.  In offering the opinion, the reviewer may assume the credibility of the lay statements of record for the limited purpose of conducting any examination and providing the medical opinion.  

3.  After any further development as may be indicated has been accomplished, readjudicate the issue on appeal.

 

 

MICHAEL E. KILCOYNE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	B. Jaigirdar, 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.