Citation Nr: 22017716 Decision Date: 03/26/22 Archive Date: 03/26/22 DOCKET NO. 17-55 078 DATE: March 26, 2022 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran was exposed to acoustic trauma during service and has experienced symptoms of tinnitus since active-duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5103, 5103A, 5107 (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.159, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 2007 to September 2011 and from January 8, 2013, to January 12, 2013. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2017 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was remanded by the Board in May 2019 and is now back before the Board for review. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted. The Veteran claims to have tinnitus due to acoustic trauma during service. Certain chronic diseases will be presumed related to service if they were shown as chronic in service; or, if they manifested to a compensable degree within a presumptive period following separation from service; or, if they were noted in service, with continuity of symptomatology since service that is attributable to the chronic disease. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331, 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The Veteran has a current diagnosis of tinnitus as evidenced by a December 2019 VA examination. Tinnitus is an organic disease of the nervous system, which is an enumerated condition under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a); Walker, 708 F.3d 1331. The Veteran reported in February 2017 and October 2019 VA examinations he experienced ringing since 2011 and that he noticed it more when he was trying to sleep. The Veteran's Service Personnel Records indicate that his M.O.S. was in aircraft fuel systems, that he had foreign service during active duty, and that he received the Afghanistan Campaign Medal with two service stars. In an April 2009 post-deployment health assessment, the Veteran reported being exposed to loud noises during a deployment. The Board finds that the Veteran's report of being exposed to loud noise in his April 2009 post-deployment health assessment is credible and consistent with his M.O.S. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to acoustic trauma during service. The Veteran's treatment records do not reflect a diagnosis for tinnitus in service or the applicable presumptive period. However, as discussed above, in his VA examinations the Veteran reported that while on active duty he noticed symptoms of tinnitus, and that his symptoms have been continuous since service. The Veteran is competent to report symptoms such as tinnitus as they are something that he senses. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). While no treatment records showing complaints of tinnitus during service or the applicable presumptive period, the Board finds that the Veteran continued to experience the same symptoms of tinnitus from his active-duty service. The Veteran is competent to report that he experienced tinnitus symptoms and his statements are credible, consistent, and entitled to probative weight. The Veteran's post-service treatment records of record do indicate that he reported symptoms of tinnitus at least as of August 2017 to a military physician. He also reported at that time that he sought treatment from a private audiologist for his tinnitus. The Veteran has attended two VA examinations for his tinnitus. In the May 2019 remand, the Board found that the February 2017 examiner's opinion was inadequate as it did not address the Veteran's report that he experienced symptoms of tinnitus since 2011. Similarly, the Board finds that the October 2019 VA examiner's opinion is inadequate because it is based on one post-deployment health assessment where the Veteran denied experiencing tinnitus in service, and upon no findings of significant threshold shift in hearing during service. The examiner did not adequately explain why the lack of a threshold shift during service indicates that the Veteran's tinnitus is not related to his active-duty service. The Board finds that the Veteran has credibly reported that he began experiencing symptoms of tinnitus during service. While the Board could remand this matter another time to correct the inadequate VA examinations and to assist the Veteran in obtaining additional post-service private treatment records, further remand is not necessary. The Board finds that the evidence of record indicates that the Veteran was exposed to acoustic trauma during service, that his tinnitus began during his active-duty service or within the presumptive period, and that his symptoms have continued since that time. Therefore, the Board resolves all doubt in favor of the Veteran and finds that the Veteran's tinnitus was related to his active-duty service and the criteria for service connection for tinnitus are met. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Boal, 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.