BVA9504992 DOCKET NO. 93-13 789 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Lori R. Bucci, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from February 1953 to February 1955. This appeal arises from a rating decision in November 1992 by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that he has tinnitus attributable to acoustic trauma which he sustained while in active service. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of the Board that the service connection for tinnitus is warranted. FINDING OF FACT The veteran’s tinnitus cannot be disassociated from his inservice acoustic trauma, and service connected right ear hearing loss. CONCLUSION OF LAW Tinnitus was incurred during the veteran’s active duty service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110, 5107 (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION Initially, the Board notes that the veteran's claim is well- grounded within the meaning of 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). That is, he has presented a claim which is plausible. The Board is also satisfied that all relevant facts have been properly developed. No further assistance to the veteran is required to comply with the duty to assist mandated by 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a). Factual Background Service medical records, including the January 1953 entrance examination and the February 1955 separation examination, are negative for any complaints or findings for tinnitus. Upon entrance, the veteran's hearing was found normal. However, the separation examination shows partial deafness in the right ear, associated with colds, which "existed prior to service." The veteran’s Department of Defense 214 Form indicates that he was in the infantry, but that he did not serve in combat. Service connection for defective hearing in the right ear has been in effect since March 1991. In a November 1964 letter, Vincent D. Gallizzi, M.D., a private physician, certified that he had examined and treated the veteran for an acute and chronic condition of the right ear on a regular basis since March 1955. The doctor presented the history that the veteran had been infected from otitis media while in the service. A January 1992 statement from the office of James F. Hora, M.D., F.A.C.S., a private physician, indicated that their treatment records from the 1960's of the veteran were lost in a 1972 flood. At a March 1992 VA compensation examination, the veteran gave the history of defective hearing since 1955 and complained of tinnitus twenty four hours a day. The diagnosis included defective hearing requiring a hearing aid, and tinnitus. At an April 1992 audiology examination, the veteran reported sudden hearing loss in the right ear approximately thirty years ago with a progressive hearing loss in the left ear over the past several years. He reported noise exposure from shooting guns in service and from working in a garment factory. The veteran complained of suffering from constant bilateral tinnitus which drove him "crazy." He reported that the tinnitus had its onset approximately the same time as the hearing loss. The veteran indicated that the right ear had a low-pitched, buzzing-type of tinnitus, and the left ear had a high-pitched, ringing-type tinnitus. The audiological test results showed that the veteran displayed a profound sensorineural hearing loss in the right ear, with a mild to severe sloping sensorineural hearing loss in the left ear. Speech reception thresholds were in good agreement with the pure tone averages, and the speech discrimination scores were very poor in the right ear and good at decibel maximum in the left ear. A hearing aid was recommended for the left ear. In statements submitted by Bernard Capizzi, Carmen Simone, and Ross Sciondra, the veteran was reported not to have suffered from hearing problems prior to enlistment. Since separation from active duty, however, the veteran was reported to have had hearing problems. In a letter received in January 1993, the veteran’s spouse wrote that when she met the veteran in 1955 he told her that he had tinnitus from firing guns in service. She further stated that the veteran still had tinnitus which had resulted in many "set- backs" and had kept him awake at night. At a March 1993 personal hearing, the veteran testified that following his basic training he was assigned to a small arms firing demonstration team for approximately eight to twelve months. During his assignment to the demonstration team, he estimated that he fired "thousands and thousands" of rounds with various small arms and automatic weapons. He stated that following these duties he developed tinnitus which "was coming and going". He was then assigned to Ft. Hood as armored personnel carrier commander. He related that he fired the 50 caliber machine gun mounted on the vehicle and after this his tinnitus never left. The veteran reported never wearing ear protection while shooting in service. He sought treatment for the condition and was advised that the disorder was fairly common in the infantry and that it should subside after his discharge. The veteran reported that the tinnitus never subsided. He indicated that following his discharge, he sought treatment from several doctors, but because of the passage of time and a 1972 flood he was unable to obtain these treatment records. The veteran indicated that he only recently filed a claim for service connection for tinnitus because he had not realized that it was considered a separate disability from his hearing loss. He described the tinnitus as loud ringing at a high frequency and the negative affect it had on his normal daily activities. The veteran reported that he had worked as a runner in an aircraft plant for a short time prior to service and after his discharge he worked for many years as a presser in the garment industry. Analysis Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110. In this case, the evidence indicates that the veteran’s hearing loss is sensorineural in nature. Moreover, the record shows that the veteran served in an infantry unit throughout his military career, and as such, we find that he was exposed to acoustic trauma inherent with service as an infantryman. While the Board concedes that tinnitus was not clinically noted until March 1992 and notes that the veteran worked post service as a presser in the garment industry, the Board finds it significant that the veteran has received treatment for hearing problems since 1955, and that there is no negative evidence pertaining to the noise level that the veteran experienced in his post service employment. Accordingly, we find that the evidence raises a reasonable doubt. As such doubt must be resolved in the veteran’s favor, 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(b), service connection for tinnitus is granted. ORDER Service connection for tinnitus is granted. DEREK R. BROWN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___ (1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be assigned to an individual member of the Board for a determination. This proceeding has been assigned to an individual member of the Board. NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991), a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals.