Citation Nr: 21028141 Decision Date: 05/10/21 Archive Date: 05/10/21 DOCKET NO. 18-25 550 DATE: May 10, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that tinnitus is due to service, to include in-service noise exposure. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from September 1989 to September 1993, with subsequent periods of reserve service. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2018rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for tinnitus because the claimed disability is the result of noise exposure in service. The RO has acknowledged the Veteran's noise exposure in service as a result of his military occupational specialty as a Field Calibration Activity Technician. Service connection may be established for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. To establish service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166 -67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Board concludes that, while the Veteran has a diagnosis of tinnitus, the preponderance of the evidence is against finding that it began during active service, or is otherwise related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. The Veteran's VA treatment records show that he first complained of tinnitus in February 2016. In a March 2016 VA treatment record, the Veteran reported that his tinnitus had its onset four years prior. The Veteran's private treatment records spanning a period from May 2007 to October 2017, show that he denied having symptoms of tinnitus on several occasions. Additionally, the private treatment records show no treatment related to symptoms of tinnitus. At a March 2016 VA examination, the Veteran reported periodic tinnitus, with an onset four years prior to the examination. The examiner opined that the Veteran's tinnitus was less likely than not related to noise exposure in service. The examiner highlighted that the Veteran's hearing was within normal limits. The examiner cited medical literature indicating that when there are no changes in hearing attributable to noise from a specific episode or period of exposure, it is less likely that tinnitus is due to that exposure. The examiner further noted that there were no complaints or diagnosis of tinnitus during active duty or any period of reserve service. In a May 2016 private treatment record, Dr. C. G. noted that one cannot say exactly how long the Veteran's tinnitus existed prior to the date of diagnosis or definitively state its cause. However, that doctor opined that it was as likely as not that the Veteran's exposure to jet engine noise and heavy equipment while in service contributed to or caused current tinnitus. There is no indication that the examiner reviewed the claims file as opposed to relying on the Veteran's self-reported history. Furthermore, the physician did not provide a rationale to support the opinion. As a result, the opinion is found to be of less probative value. The Veteran submitted a December 2017 lay statement by F.A.B. in support of the claim. F.A.B. indicated that the Veteran complained of ringing in the ears since separation from service and experienced difficulties holding phone conversations. However, that is weighed against the Veteran's own reports in a March 2016 VA treatment record, indicating that his tinnitus had its onset four years prior; the March 2016 VA examination, where he also reported his tinnitus having its onset four years prior; and the private treatment records submitted by the Veteran indicating that he denied symptoms of tinnitus on several occasions dating back to 2005. The Board finds that the most persuasive evidence of record is the March 2016 VA examination as that examiner reviewed the record and examined the Veteran. The Board also finds the contemporary evidence prior to 2012 when the Veteran denied tinnitus symptoms and stated in 2016 that the tinnitus started four year prior is more credible than later statements that tinnitus has been present since service. While the Veteran believes his tinnitus is related noise exposure in service, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence weighs against finding that the Veteran's tinnitus is related to service or noise exposure in service. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Harvey P. Roberts Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Cross, 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.