Citation Nr: 21032631 Decision Date: 05/27/21 Archive Date: 05/27/21 DOCKET NO. 16-33 625 DATE: May 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for right shoulder pain/arthritis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's tinnitus began after being exposed to loud noise during a period of INACDUTRA. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are 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 in the Tennessee Army National Guard from March 1975 to October 2004, to include a period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) from April 1975 to August 1975, as well as various periods of inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA). This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 rating decision from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Tennessee. In perfecting his appeal, the Veteran expressly did not appeal his bilateral hearing loss claim. See Evans v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 7 (2011) and thus this issue is not before the Board. In May 2021 correspondence, the Veteran indicated that he wished to withdraw his hearing request and have the Board decide his appeal based on the evidence of record. 1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus The Veteran contends that service connection is warranted for his tinnitus because the disability began during a period of INACDUTRA. The Board concludes that the Veteran has a current disability that began during a period of INACDUTRA. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1363, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). The Veteran was afforded a VA hearing loss and tinnitus examination in September 2014. A diagnosis of tinnitus was noted, and the examiner opined against service connection, noting that the onset in the 1990s was after the Veteran's period of ACDUTRA in 1975. In his July 2016 appeal to the Board, the Veteran stated that his ears began ringing during a drill weekend when a tank engine was started inside of a work bay. He stated that his ears have intermittently been ringing ever since. The Board notes that the presence of tinnitus is not directly noted or evaluated on military examination forms, nor are service personnel questioned directly regarding a history of, or current tinnitus on reports of medical history. Most types of tinnitus are detectable only to the person experiencing tinnitus and, as such, lay testimony is considered competent to identify both the symptoms of tinnitus, and the date of onset of tinnitus. Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370 (2002). Accordingly, in contrast to hearing loss, there is no contemporaneous evidence weighing against the credibility of the Veteran's assertion that his tinnitus began during a period of INACDUTRA Upon review of the record, the Board finds the evidence to at least be in equipoise as to whether the Veteran's current tinnitus arose in service. Accordingly, after resolving all doubt in favor of the Veteran, the Board finds that service connection for tinnitus is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for right shoulder pain/arthritis is remanded. The Veteran contends that during a physical fitness test he hurt his right shoulder which has never healed. As the Veteran has asserted an injury during a period of INACDUTRA, the Board remands this matter to verify the Veteran's periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA and to provide him with an examination to determine the nature and etiology of his right shoulder condition. 2. Entitlement to service connection for hypertension is remanded. The Veteran has asserted that his hypertension was diagnosed during a period of INACDUTRA. The Board remands this matter to verify his periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA and to afford him an examination to determine the etiology of his hypertension. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's complete service personnel records, to include all documents pertaining to his service in the Tennessee Army National Guard. Verify all active duty for training and inactive duty training dates for alleged service in the Tennessee Army National Guard from 1975 to 2004. If necessary, a request should be made to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS). Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his right shoulder condition. The examiner must review the claims file. If a diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran's condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a "disability" for the purpose of providing the requested opinion(s) below. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Is the right shoulder condition at least as likely as not related to service, including a claimed injury during physical training during a period of INACDUTRA in 1995 or 1998? The examiner must address the Veteran's contention that his right shoulder began to hurt during a period of ACDUTRA in 1998 and that it has not stopped hurting since. The examiner's attention is invited to the February 2000 report of medical history for periodic examination in which the Veteran denied experiencing a painful or trick shoulder and stated that he was in good health and was not taking medication. Provide a rationale to support the opinion. It is not sufficient to base an opinion on a mere lack of documentation of complaints in the service or post-service treatment records. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination for his hypertension. The examiner must review the claims file. If a diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran's condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a "disability" for the purpose of providing the requested opinion(s) below. The examiner is asked to provide a response to the following: Is hypertension at least as likely as not related to service? What is the likelihood that the Veteran's hypertension pre-existed the Veteran's service? What is the likelihood that the Veteran's hypertension worsened beyond the natural progress of the condition during service? The examiner must opine whether it is at least as likely as not related to service. Provide a rationale to support the opinions. It is not sufficient to base an opinion on a mere lack of documentation of complaints in the service or post-service treatment records. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Brian P. Keeley 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.