TINNITUS

Summary

The Veteran, an Army veteran who served from August 2002 to August 2007 and February 2009 to February 2010, including combat deployments to Iraq, appeals the denial of service connection for tinnitus. The Board previously denied this claim in February 2025, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) granted a Joint Motion for Remand in December 2025, vacating the Board's prior decision. The Veteran claims tinnitus resulted from noise exposure during service, with symptoms beginning during service and continuing to the present. The Board found the Veteran credible and competent to report tinnitus symptoms, noting the condition's nature does not require specialized medical knowledge. While service treatment records (STRs) showed no in-service complaints, the Board acknowledged the Veteran's consistent lay reports of continuous tinnitus since service. A VA examination in October 2023 opined that tinnitus was less likely than not related to service, citing the lack of in-service complaints in STRs and insufficient medical evidence linking toxic exposure to tinnitus. However, the Board found the evidence to be at least in equipoise, giving the Veteran the benefit of the doubt. The Board also noted that the Veteran's service in combat areas and conceded in-service noise exposure satisfied the first two elements of service connection. Consequently, service connection for tinnitus was granted.

Rationale

Veteran credible and competent to report tinnitus symptoms; Evidence found to be at least in equipoise; Benefit of the doubt applied

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040642
Decision Date: 04/30/26	Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 231005-383127
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

The weight of the probative evidence of record is at least in equipoise regarding whether the Veteran has continuously had symptoms of tinnitus since service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for entitlement to service connection for tinnitus have been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1154, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from August 2002 to August 2007, and from February 2009 to February 2010.

The Veteran's claim was initially before the Board in February 2025.  At that time, the Board denied the claim of entitlement to service connection for tinnitus.  The Veteran appealed the February 2025 Board decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court).  In December 2025, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) vacating the Board's decision which denied entitlement to service connection for tinnitus.

Service Connection

Generally, to prevail on a direct service connection claim, there must be competent evidence of (1) a current disability, (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury, and (3) a nexus between the in-service disease or injury and the current disability.  Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009); 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a).

Certain "chronic diseases" may be presumed to have been incurred in service if they manifest to a compensable degree within one year of separation from service; however, if the evidence of the record is insufficient to establish a disease was chronic in service, and/or manifested within the specified time period, then there must be a continuity of disease symptoms shown after discharge in order to warrant service connection.  38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b).  Tinnitus and hearing loss, organic diseases of the nervous system, are a chronic disease under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a).

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus

The Veteran contends that tinnitus is the result of noise exposure during active service, and that he began experiencing ringing in the ears during, which has continued to the present.  A review of the competent evidence of record shows the Veteran has credibly reported symptoms of tinnitus continuously since service.  While there are negative VA examination opinions of record, the Board finds that as the Veteran is competent and credible in providing evidence of the presence of tinnitus, the evidence is considered at least in equipoise.  Therefore, the claim for service connection for tinnitus must be granted.

The October 2023 rating decision determined that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of tinnitus. The Board is bound by this favorable finding. The question for the Board is whether the Veteran's tinnitus was incurred in service or is related to his in-service noise exposure.

The Veteran has asserted that his tinnitus is due to his active service noise exposure to various weapons, explosives, and machinery/vehicles during his active service. To this end, the Board notes that the Veteran's service record does show that the Veteran did serve in combat areas, to include deployment in Iraq.  As such, the Board finds that in-service noise exposure is also conceded.  Therefore, the first two elements of service connection have been established and also conceded by the RO in its favorable findings.

Turning to the third and final element of service connection, also known as the nexus element, here, the Board finds that the Veteran, as a lay person, is both credible and competent to speak to the medical condition of tinnitus, and the fact that it has been continuous since active service.  Specifically, the Board finds that tinnitus, which manifests as ringing in the ears, is not the type of medical condition in which requires specialized medical knowledge or training to assess.  Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007).  A lay person, such as the Veteran, may competently provide evidence that he perceives ringing in the ears.  Similarly, the Veteran may also competently provide evidence of when that condition started and if it has continued to the present.
 the Board finds that the Veteran, as a lay person, is both credible and competent to speak to the medical condition of tinnitus, and the fact that it has been continuous since active service.  Specifically, the Board finds that tinnitus, which manifests as ringing in the ears, is not the type of medical condition in which requires specialized medical knowledge or training to assess.  Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2007).  A lay person, such as the Veteran, may competently provide evidence that he perceives ringing in the ears.  Similarly, the Veteran may also competently provide evidence of when that condition started and if it has continued to the present.  During his October 2023 VA examination, the Veteran asserted that the onset of his tinnitus symptoms was as early as 2006, or during his service, and that those symptoms have continued until the present.

The Board further finds that the Veteran's lay statements regarding the continuity of tinnitus symptoms to be credible.  The Board notes that the Veteran has noted that the ringing in his ears began during service, and that those symptoms have continued to the present.  To this end, the Veteran explicitly was noted to report that symptoms of his tinnitus started as early as 2006, during his service, which was asserted again during his VA examination in October 2023.  Therefore, the Board finds the Veteran credible with regards to the continuity of tinnitus since service.

With respect to whether there is a nexus or relationship between current tinnitus and service, in an examination and opinion acquired by VA in October 2023, an examiner opined that it was less likely as not that the claimed tinnitus was related to service.  The October 2023 opinion relied on the fact that the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) noted no complaints of tinnitus during active service, to include upon separation from service.  In this opinion, the examiner also found against any etiological nexus to the Veteran's conceded toxic exposure during his deployment in Southwest Asia, noting that there was insufficient medical evidence to show a correlation between such exposure and the Veteran's development of tinnitus.  Therefore, the examiner found no nexus between the Veteran's tinnitus and his active service.

While the Board acknowledges that a review of the STRs shows no evidence of complaints or treatments for tinnitus, the Board nonetheless finds that an observable condition such as tinnitus can be competently described by the Veteran, a lay person, and require no supporting medical evidence to be considered present.  Here, even assigning the October 2023 VA examination report full probative value, the Board finds that the positive and negative evidence regarding this claim is at least in equipoise.

Therefore, based on the evidence and arguments presented, the Board finds that the Veteran's tinnitus was present during service and has a continuity of symptomatology since service.  Accordingly, the claim for service connection for tinnitus must be granted.  Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303(b).

 

 

DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Ziheng Zhu, 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.