Citation Nr: 21014560 Decision Date: 03/15/21 Archive Date: 03/15/21 DOCKET NO. 16-03 684 DATE: March 15, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT The probative evidence of record is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s current tinnitus is related to his service. CONCLUSION OF LAW Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the criteria for entitlement to 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 Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from March 25, 1971 to April 17, 1972, including in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision issued in November 2014 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran seeks entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. He contends that his tinnitus began while serving in the Army and was caused by the same acoustic trauma for which he was granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss. Generally, service connection may be established for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection for certain chronic diseases, including organic diseases of the nervous system such as tinnitus, may also be established on a presumptive basis by showing that the disease manifested to a compensable degree during service or within one year from the date of separation from active service. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(3), 3.309(a). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). In October 2014, the Veteran underwent a VA audiological examination in relation to his claims for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. The examiner rendered a positive opinion for service connection for hearing loss based on the lack of an audiometric test at separation, reported military noise exposure, and the Veteran’s reported use of hearing protection occupationally and recreationally after separation from the military. The Veteran’s DD-214 shows a principal duty of Light Vehicle Driver in Vietnam which has a high probability of noise exposure. This is consistent with the examiner’s finding of military noise exposure. Regarding tinnitus, the examiner wrote that the Veteran reported the onset of tinnitus 20 years earlier. According to the examiner, the Veteran reported that he finds the tinnitus distracting and it makes it hard for him to get to sleep. On the question of etiology of tinnitus, the VA audiologist determined that it was less likely than not that his tinnitus was related to his in-service noise exposure. In support of her conclusion, the audiologist reported that the onset of tinnitus was reported after the service-connected hearing loss and many years after separation from service. In February 2016, the Veteran’s representative submitted a statement that the Veteran reported to the VA examiner that he had suffered with tinnitus for the last 20 years and the VA examiner used that as the date of onset. The representative stated that the examiner should have asked when the Veteran first noted the reported hissing sound, not when it started becoming a problem. With respect to the current disability element of service connection, tinnitus is readily observable by laypersons, and medical expertise is not required to establish its existence. See Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). Therefore, the Veteran’s assertion that he currently has tinnitus constitutes competent evidence of a current disability of tinnitus. Furthermore, the Board finds that nothing in the record impugns his credibility on the matter and concludes that the Veteran has a current disability of tinnitus. Finally, the Veteran submitted private medical records from May 2009 and May 2015 that confirm the diagnosis of tinnitus and note his history of noise exposure. With respect to an in-service injury or disease, the October 2014 VA examiner’s findings regarding hearing loss are relevant to the Veteran’s claim for service connection for tinnitus. The examiner conceded in-service noise exposure and a lack of significant post-service noise exposure. Additionally, in-service noise exposure is consistent with the circumstances of the Veteran’s service as documented by his service records. 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a). The Veteran asserts that he developed tinnitus as a result of his in-service noise exposure. The Board finds no reason to question the credibility of the Veteran’s assertion that he misunderstood the examiner’s question regarding the onset of his tinnitus to mean when tinnitus became a problem for him. Accordingly, despite the absence of contemporaneous records showing in-service complaints of tinnitus, the Board finds that the Veteran's tinnitus had its onset during service. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (it may not be determined that lay evidence lacks credibility merely because the evidence is unaccompanied by contemporaneous medical evidence). Under these circumstances, all reasonable doubt is resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert, supra. After considering all of the evidence of record, the Board determines that service connection for tinnitus is warranted. The claim is granted. R. FEINBERG Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals J. Morgan, Attorney for the Board Department of Veterans Affairs 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.