Citation Nr: 19100034 Decision Date: 01/02/19 Archive Date: 01/02/19 DOCKET NO. 17-29 122 DATE: January 2, 2019 ORDER Entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss manifests, at worst, to Level IV hearing impairment in the right ear and Level I hearing impairment in the left ear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an initial compensable disability rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code (DC) 6100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the Air Force from September 1955 to May 1959. Increased Rating for Bilateral Hearing Loss The Veteran contends that his service-connected bilateral hearing loss warrants a compensable rating. For the reasons that follow, the Board concludes that an compensable rating is not warranted. Disability evaluations are determined by the application of a schedule of ratings which is based on average impairment of earning capacity. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. Disabilities must be reviewed in relation to their history. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Other applicable, general policy considerations are: interpreting reports of examination in light of the whole recorded history, reconciling the various reports into a consistent picture so that the current rating may accurately reflect the elements of disability, 38 C.F.R. § 4.2; resolving reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability in favor of the claimant, 38 C.F.R. § 4.3; where there is a question as to which of two evaluations apply, assigning a higher of the two where the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria for the next higher rating, 38 C.F.R. § 4.7; and, evaluating functional impairment on the basis of lack of usefulness, and the effects of the disabilities upon the person’s ordinary activity, 38 C.F.R. § 4.10. See Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1991). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Evaluations of defective hearing range from noncompensable to 100 percent based on organic impairment of hearing acuity as measured by the results of speech discrimination tests, together with the average hearing threshold levels as measured by pure tone audiometry tests in the frequencies 1,000, 2,000, 3,000, and 4,000 cycles per second (Hertz). To evaluate the degree of disability for service-connected hearing loss, the rating schedule establishes eleven auditory acuity levels, designated from Level I for essentially normal acuity through Level XI for profound deafness. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. Examinations are conducted without the use of hearing aids. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 (a). Disability ratings for hearing impairment are derived by a mechanical application of the rating schedule to the numeric designations assigned after audiometric evaluations are rendered. See Bruce v. West, 11 Vet. App. 405, 409 (1998), quoting Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349 (1992). The Veteran has been assigned a noncompensable rating for his bilateral hearing loss. The Veteran underwent a VA audiology examination in March 2016 and reported difficulty watching movies and having to ask for repetition during conversation. On audiological examination, pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 35 25 35 75 80 LEFT 35 25 35 65 85 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 92 percent in the right ear and of 96 percent in the left ear. Pure tone thresholds averaged 54 in the right ear and 53 in the left ear. Under Table VI, when considered with the Veteran’s speech audiometry results, this corresponds to Level I in the right ear and Level I in the left ear. These categories correspond with a noncompensable disability rating under Table VII. Pure tone thresholds at each of the four specified frequencies (1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz) were not 55 decibels or more, or 30 decibels or less at 1000 Hertz and 70 decibels or more at 2000 Hertz, and thus the Veteran does not meet the criteria for a higher disability evaluation for exceptional hearing impairment in either ear. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.86. The Veteran also underwent a private hearing test in May 2017. On audiological examination, pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT 30 30 50 70 90 LEFT 20 20 25 65 75 Speech audiometry revealed speech discrimination ability of 80 percent in the right ear and of 95 percent in the left ear. The examination report documents that the discrimination test was the W-22 test. VA regulations specify that an examination for hearing impairment for VA purposes must include the Maryland CNC speech discrimination test. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. Hence, this examination is not probative. Even if it were, the values correspond to Level IV in the right ear and Level II in the left ear and do not meet the criteria for an exceptional hearing impairment. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.85, 4.86. Therefore, the examination results do not provide evidence for a compensable evaluation. The Board has considered the Veteran’s lay statements that his hearing loss is worse than currently evaluated. The Veteran has reported that he must ask for repetition when talking to others and he uses the telephone on speaker in order to hear conversations. The Veteran is competent to report his symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to him through his senses. Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465 (1994). However, the Board finds that the objective measurements of hearing loss fall outside the realm of common knowledge of a layperson and the Veteran is, thus, not competent to provide evidence on the issue of severity. See Jandreau, 492 F.3d at 1377, n.4; Woehlaert v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 456, 462 (2007). The Board finds that the VA examinations described herein are more probative than the Veteran’s subjective complaints of increased symptomatology in establishing the specific level of hearing loss in light of the rating schedule, which is determined by objective levels of hearing acuity. The Board acknowledges the difficulties that the Veteran experiences as a result of his hearing loss. However, as explained above, the assignment of disability ratings for hearing impairment is derived by a mechanical application of the rating schedule to the numeric designation assigned after audiometry results are obtained. Thus, the Board must predicate its determination on the basis of the results of the audiology results of record. See Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (1992). As such, the Board is bound by law to apply VA’s rating schedule based on the Veteran’s audiometry results. See 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. His symptoms are contemplated by the rating schedule. The audiometric evaluations discussed above do not reveal results warranting an initial compensable rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss. As such, a higher evaluation for bilateral hearing loss is denied. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule is not for application. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 4.3; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (1990). JAMES G. REINHART Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Freeman, Associate Counsel