Citation Nr: 18143041 Decision Date: 10/17/18 Archive Date: 10/17/18 DOCKET NO. 16-29 069 DATE: October 17, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss is denied. REMANDED Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for left ear hearing loss is remanded. Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for orchialgia is remanded. Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 50 percent for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The weight of the competent and probative evidence is against finding that the Veteran has right ear hearing loss under 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.385. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 2004 to August 2012. A June 2016 rating decision, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) granted entitlement to service connection for tinnitus. Therefore, as the issue has been granted in full, it is not before the Board. Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156, 1159 (Fed. Cir. 1997). Entitlement to service connection for hearing loss, right ear In general, service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection requires competent evidence showing: (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, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004); see also Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995). In addition to the basic service connection principles outlined above, hearing loss is not deemed disabling for VA purposes unless the claimed hearing loss is of a particular level of severity. In that regard, hearing impairment will be considered a disability only when the puretone threshold for any of the frequencies at 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; the thresholds at three of these frequencies are 26 or greater; or, speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Analysis The Veteran asserts that his right ear hearing loss is caused by acoustic trauma he experienced during service. In July 2016, the Veteran was afforded a VA audiological examination to determine the nature and etiology of his hearing loss. Puretone threshold levels in decibels were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 25 20 20 20 15 LEFT 25 20 25 30 65 The average puretone threshold findings at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz (HZ) for the right ear was 19 and 35 for the left ear. Speech recognition scores based on the Maryland CNC Test was 95 in the right ear and 80 in the left. Testing revealed normal hearing in the right ear. The examiner noted that the Veteran’s hearing loss did not impact the Veteran’s ordinary conditions of daily life, to include his ability to work. Regarding the Veteran’s right ear, puretone threshold for the frequencies at 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz was not 40 decibels or greater; the thresholds at three of the frequencies were not 26 or greater; and/or the speech recognition score using the Maryland CNC Test was not less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, the Board finds that the weight of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran has right ear hearing loss for VA purposes. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.385. Without competent evidence of right ear hearing loss, the Board must deny the Veteran’s claim. See Degmetich v. Brown, 104 F.3d 1328, 1333 (1997). The Board has considered the Veteran and his representative’s lay statements. However, the results of testing prepared by skilled professionals are more probative of the degree of the disability because the schedular criteria are predicated on audiological findings rather than subjective reports of severity of hearing loss. Ratings of hearing loss disability involve mechanical application of the rating criteria to the findings on official audiometry. See Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (1992). The Board is bound to apply the VA Rating Schedule, under which the rating criteria are defined by audiometric test findings. The Board has considered the applicability of the benefit of the doubt doctrine. However, as the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, that doctrine is not applicable. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert, 1 Vet. App. at 53-56. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to initial compensable ratings for left ear hearing loss; orchialgia; PTSD; and entitlement to TDIU In a September 29, 2016 rating decision, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) granted service connection for orchialgia and left ear hearing loss and assigned noncompensable ratings. The AOJ also granted service connection for PTSD and assigned a 50 percent rating. On September 21, 2017, the Veteran filed a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) disagreeing with the evaluations. A review of the record reveals that the Veteran has not been issued a Statement of the Case (SOC) for his increased rating claims. As the RO has not yet provided the Veteran with an SOC, the Board is required to remand these issues. See Manlicon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-41 (1999). The Board notes that the claim for TDIU is “inextricably intertwined” with the claims on appeal so it must be remanded. Parker v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 116 (1994); Harris v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991). Additionally, in its May 2014 decision denying entitlement to TDIU, the AOJ noted that the Veteran did not return/submitted a TDIU application. On remand, the Veteran should be provided another application. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain and associate all outstanding VA treatment records with the claims file. 2. Issue a notice letter to the Veteran concerning the claim for TDIU. Ask him to complete a VA Form 21-8940, Veteran’s Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. Upon receipt of the form, complete any additional development. 3. Then, readjudicate the issues on appeal. If any of the benefits sought on appeal remain denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative a Statement of the Case and afford them the opportunity to respond before the file is returned to the Board for further consideration. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD T. Henry, Associate Counsel