TINNITUS

Summary

The Veteran, an Army veteran who served from April 1995 to June 2000, appeals the January 2025 rating decision concerning his claim for service connection for tinnitus. The Veteran elected the Direct Review docket, limiting the Board's review to evidence of record at the time of the AOJ decision. The Veteran contends that his tinnitus is related to service, stating it began while he was an aircraft maintenance technician exposed to excessive noise. The Board found the Veteran's lay testimony regarding the in-service onset and continuity of tinnitus symptoms to be probative and credible. Given the conceded exposure to excessive noise during service and the absence of any intervening cause, the Board found a nexus between the tinnitus and active service was established. Service connection for tinnitus was granted.

Rationale

Veteran's lay testimony regarding in-service onset and continuity of tinnitus is probative and credible.; Conceded exposure to excessive noise during active service.; No intervening cause shown for the condition.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040781
Decision Date: 04/30/26	Archive Date: 04/30/26

DOCKET NO. 250912-586124
DATE: April 30, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is granted.

FINDING OF FACT

The Veteran's tinnitus is etiologically related to service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

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

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served honorably in the United States Army from April 1995 to June 2000.  This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from January 2025 rating decision from the Virginia Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

In the September 2025 VA Form 10182, Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket.  Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the January 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.301.  Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board.  38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

Service Connection

Under the relevant laws and regulations, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service.  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), 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.310.  Generally, the evidence must show: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service.  Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 505 (1995).

1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus

The Veteran contends that his tinnitus is related to service.  After a review of the evidence, the Board agrees.

A veteran is competent to testify to that which is actually observed and is within the realm of personal knowledge.  Competent lay testimony is confined to the features or symptoms of an injury or illness.  Layno v. Brown, 6 Vat. App. 465 (1994).  Particularly, a Veteran is competent to testify to in-service acoustic trauma, in-service symptoms of tinnitus, and post-service continuous symptoms of tinnitus "because ringing in the ears is capable of lay observation.")  Charles v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 370, 374 (2002).

The Veteran states that his tinnitus began in service while acting as an aircraft maintenance technician.  Thus, the Board finds the first two service connection elements have been met.  See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).  The Veteran has reported chronic tinnitus which developed during service.  Moreover, the exposure to excessive noise during active service has been conceded.  Because tinnitus is capable of lay observation, and no intervening cause for the condition is shown in the record, a nexus between the Veteran's tinnitus and active service is established, as continuity of symptomatology has been shown.

The Board finds the Veteran's statements probative and credible to the effect that his tinnitus began in service and continued thereafter.  Accordingly, service connection for the condition is warranted.  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.

 

 

B.T. KNOPE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Ballinger, Daniel 


.

The Board finds the Veteran's statements probative and credible to the effect that his tinnitus began in service and continued thereafter.  Accordingly, service connection for the condition is warranted.  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.

 

 

B.T. KNOPE

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Ballinger, Daniel