The Tinnitus DBQ is the shortest in the schedule. There is no severity tier, no objective test, and no measurement to take. The rating is a flat 10%, and the examiner’s questions are aimed at confirming three things: do you have it, did it start during or after service, and is there an in-service noise exposure to attribute it to. If yes to all three, you get DC 6260 at 10% under 38 CFR § 4.87. That is the whole exam.
The brevity of this DBQ is why understanding it matters. Veterans assume because tinnitus is simple it will be granted automatically — and many are then surprised when the C&P examiner’s opinion is “less likely than not related to service.” The handful of phrases that decide the case are easy to surface, and easy to fumble.
What the examiner is filling out
The DBQ (Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire — tinnitus is bundled with the hearing exam) has these sections relevant to tinnitus:
- Does the veteran report recurrent tinnitus? Yes / No. Your answer is the evidence.
- Date of onset. When did it start? Year, approximate month, or general life-period.
- Etiology / nexus opinion. The examiner’s medical opinion: is the tinnitus at least as likely as not caused by an in-service event or exposure? This is the box that decides service connection.
- Functional effect. Brief description of how tinnitus impacts daily life. Does not affect the 10% rating but supports secondary claims (insomnia, anxiety, depression).
The § 4.87 DC 6260 schedule
Flat 10% with no severity tier. Bilateral does not pay more than unilateral. Confirmed by the Federal Circuit in Smith v. Nicholson (2007).
The phrases that secure the grant
Magic words for this tier
For establishing tinnitus exists:
- “Yes, I have constant ringing in both ears.”
- “It is recurrent and present every day.”
- “It is worse in quiet environments.”
Magic words for this tier
For nexus to service:
- “It started during my service in [year], around the time of [specific noise event or deployment].”
- “I was exposed to [weapons fire / artillery / aircraft / generators / explosions] regularly during my service as a [MOS].”
- “The ringing has continued without interruption since service.”
- “I was not exposed to comparable civilian noise after separating.”
Why the noise-exposure framing is everything
The examiner can confirm the diagnosis on your statement alone — that part is easy — but the nexus opinion they write is what the rater reads to grant or deny service connection. The opinion turns on whether you established an in-service noise exposure. The good news: the VA Adjudication Procedures Manual (M21-1, Part III, Subpart iv) carries probability-of-exposure tables by MOS. Most combat-arms, motor pool, aviation, artillery, and engineer MOSs are high-probability for hazardous noise, and the exposure is essentially conceded at the regional office level.
The trap is when the MOS does not obviously map to noise. Cooks, supply clerks, admin specialists, medics, finance — the examiner may write “limited noise exposure consistent with MOS,” and that can sink the claim. The fix: come with specific descriptions of incidental noise (annual weapons qualification, motor pool details, deployment to noisy areas, generator duty, vehicle operations) AND a buddy statement corroborating one or two specific events. See the buddy statement guide for the template.
What NOT to say
What NOT to say
- “It comes and goes.” The schedule asks about recurrent tinnitus — be specific about frequency (daily / weekly).
- “Only my left ear.” OK to state if true, but it does not earn extra rating.
- “It started a few years after I got out.” (Cuts the in-service onset element; if true, file with the actual timeline and rely on the nexus opinion to connect post-service tinnitus to in-service noise exposure.)
- “I worked construction / on a flight line / at a shooting range after the military.” (Volunteers a post-service intervening cause the examiner can attribute the tinnitus to. Answer honestly if asked, but do not volunteer.)
- “It’s probably just age.” (Gives the examiner the “less likely than not” opinion on a plate.)
File hearing loss at the same time
Hearing loss (DC 6100) is rated separately from tinnitus and uses the audiogram results from the same exam. Most veterans with documented noise exposure have measurable high-frequency loss, even when conversational hearing seems fine. File both conditions on Form 21-526EZ. If hearing loss rates at 0% on the first decision, the claim stays in your file for future increase as your hearing deteriorates.
The audiogram piece of the exam will measure pure-tone thresholds at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz, plus a Maryland CNC speech discrimination score. The schedule under 38 CFR § 4.85 Table VI turns those numbers into a Roman-numeral level, and the combination of left and right levels gives the rating tier. Bring nothing — the audiology test is conducted at the exam.
Where the bigger ratings come from
Once tinnitus is granted at 10%, the secondary claims become available under 38 CFR § 3.310(a). The well-documented downstream effects are:
- Insomnia / chronic sleep disturbance.
- Anxiety / depression (DC 9434 / 9400 / 9411).
- Migraine aggravation (DC 8100).
- Sleep apnea (DC 6847) where a sleep study confirms OSA.
The Secondary Conditions Mapper walks each tinnitus-related secondary and the evidence required.
Use this with the rest of the site
- ▸ Tinnitus condition guide — the full rating schedule, evidence checklist, and tactical plays.
- ▸ C&P Exam Prep generator — builds a personalized checklist for your specific conditions.
- ▸ Claim Coach — walks you through the 10 steps including C&P prep at Step 7.
- ▸ Full C&P exam guide — the universal say/don’t-say rules that apply to every exam.
Educational content only. DBQ structures are public knowledge from M21-1 and archived sources; VA discontinued public DBQ distribution in 2020 but the rating criteria these forms map to remain in 38 CFR Part 4. Not legal or medical advice. Always consult a VA-accredited VSO or attorney for claim-specific guidance. CFR citations: 38 CFR § 4.87 (Diagnostic Code 6260), § 4.85 (DC 6100), § 3.310(a), § 3.159(a)(2). Federal Circuit precedent: Smith v. Nicholson (2007), Charles v. Principi (2002), Jandreau v. Nicholson (2007)..