Citation Nr: 21013921 Decision Date: 03/10/21 Archive Date: 03/10/21 DOCKET NO. 18-38 977 DATE: March 10, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, his tinnitus is at least as likely as not related to his military service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The served on active duty from October 1992 to December 2001. These matters are before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ). In March 2021, the Veteran testified at a Virtual Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110. Establishing service connection generally requires competent evidence of three things: (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship, i.e., a nexus, between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). The Veteran seeks service connection for his tinnitus, which he contends began in service and has been recurrent since that time. All three elements of service connection are established by the competent and credible lay and medical evidence of record. The Veteran has current tinnitus. See January 2016 VA examination report. The Veteran reported he experienced the onset of tinnitus in 1995 during service. He is competent to report noise exposure in service. The Board observes the AOJ has indicated that in-service noise exposure has been conceded. The Board notes that the VA examiner offered an opinion in January in which she concluded, in part, that tinnitus was not due to service, as the service treatment records (STRs) show no treatment for, or complaints of, tinnitus. The Board finds that the evidence is at least in equipoise on the question of whether tinnitus is related to service. Although the VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s tinnitus disability was not related to service, she based her opinion essentially on the fact that STRs are silent for such disability. Lack of contemporaneous treatment records is not fatal to the Veteran’s claim. Throughout the course of this appeal, he has consistently asserted that he has experienced tinnitus since his military service. The positive and negative evidence as to the etiology of the Veteran’s tinnitus is in equipoise. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, service connection for tinnitus is warranted. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded. The Veteran asserts that he is entitled to service connection for bilateral hearing loss due to noise exposure in service. The Veteran underwent a VA examination most recently in January 2016. Right ear threshold findings were normal; however, the left ear showed hearing loss for VA compensation purposes. The VA examiner found the Veteran’s hearing loss is less likely than not related to service because there was no significant threshold shift between the entrance and separation exams with no other in-service evidence of hearing loss. In June 2016, the Veteran submitted a private audiological evaluation. The report suggests current hearing loss that is due to in-service noise exposure. The Board finds that this examination report needs to be considered in a VA examination. Accordingly, the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is remanded for a new VA examination. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any bilateral hearing loss. The examiner must opine whether any current hearing loss is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including in-service noise exposure (that has been conceded). 2. A complete examination must also include rationales for all opinions offered. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. McPhaull, 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.