Citation Nr: 21003285 Decision Date: 01/21/21 Archive Date: 01/21/21 DOCKET NO. 15-23 672 DATE: January 21, 2021 ORDER An initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT At its worst, the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss has been characterized by numeric designation Level II in the right ear and Level II in the left ear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an initial compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code 6100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve from May 1989 to August 1989 and from November 1990 to May 1991. The matter is on appeal before the Board from an August 2016 rating decision. The Veteran provided testimony at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in October 2018. A transcript of the hearing is of record. In May 2019 the Board remanded the issue for further development. Increased Rating Bilateral Hearing Loss Procedurally, the Veteran was granted service connection for bilateral hearing loss with a noncompensable evaluation effective July 15, 2016 by an August 2016 rating decision. In September 2016, the Veteran submitted a Notice of Disagreement (NOD), in which he disagreed with the noncompensable evaluation and noted that he sought a 30 percent evaluation. He explained that his hearing is very good when he is in an enclosed area sitting and talking to a single person, but when he is around others or other noises then he does not hear well enough to understand what is actually being said to him or around him, and he has to ask for people to repeat themselves many times. A Statement of the Case was issued in April 2017, and afterwards the Veteran filed a VA Form 9 appeal to the Board in April 2017. As previously noted, the Board remanded the issue in May 2019 to provide the Veteran with a new VA examination. In October 2020, a Supplemental Statement of the Case was issued. Disability ratings for hearing loss are derived from a mechanical application of the rating schedule to the numeric designations resulting from audiometric testing. Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (1992). Evaluations of hearing impairment range from non-compensable to 100 percent based on organic impairment of hearing acuity, as measured by the results of a controlled Maryland CNC speech discrimination test, together with the average hearing threshold level measured by puretone audiometry tests in the frequencies of 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 cycles per second (Hertz). 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Diagnostic Code 6100. To evaluate the degree of disability from service-connected bilateral hearing loss, the rating schedule establishes 11 auditory hearing acuity levels designated from Level I for essentially normal hearing acuity through Level XI for profound deafness. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Tables VI and VII. An exceptional pattern of hearing impairment occurs when the puretone threshold at each of the four specified frequencies (1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz) is 55 decibels or more. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86(a). In that situation, the rating specialist will determine the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment from either Table VI or Table VIA, whichever results in the higher numeral. Further, when the average pure tone threshold is 30 decibels or less at 1000 Hertz, and 70 decibels or more at 2000 Hertz, the rating specialist will determine the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment from either Table VI or Table VIA, whichever results in the higher numeral, and that numeral will then be elevated to the next higher numeral. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86(b). The Veteran most recently underwent a VA examination pertaining to his bilateral hearing loss in October 2020. The Veteran’s Maryland CNC Word List speech recognition score and puretone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 1000 2000 3000 4000 Avg CNC RIGHT 25 25 30 25 26 86 LEFT 25 20 30 20 24 94 The application of Table VI to the above scores yields a Level II designation for the right ear, and a Level I designation for the left ear. Inserting the levels into Table VII yields a non-compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 6100. An exceptional pattern of hearing impairment under 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 was not shown. The Veteran was noted to have been issued hearing aids by VA a year prior. He reported that his hearing loss impacts his daily life because he has difficulty with conversations and relies on lipreading. He also noted that he cannot hear his wife from the other room. In addition, he reported that he has trouble hearing on the intercom at work and must look up addresses on the computer in the fire truck. Prior, the Veteran underwent a VA examination pertaining to his bilateral hearing loss in August 2016. The Veteran’s Maryland CNC Word List speech recognition score and puretone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 1000 2000 3000 4000 Avg CNC RIGHT 15 10 20 25 18 90 LEFT 15 25 30 30 25 90 The application of Table VI to the above scores yields a Level II designation for the right ear, and a Level II designation for the left ear. Inserting the levels into Table VII yields a non-compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 6100. An exceptional pattern of hearing impairment under 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 was not shown. The Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss was not reported to impact the ordinary conditions of his daily life, including his ability to work. A review of the Veteran’s VA and private treatment records does not provide any further findings than those relayed above in relation to the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss. The Board notes that at the October 2018 Board hearing the Veteran reported that he felt his bilateral hearing loss had gotten worse since the August 2016 VA examination. He relayed that when he is not looking directly at someone while they are speaking to him and he is unable to at least follow their lips, then it makes it difficult for him to hear or comprehend what someone is actually saying. The application of the Veteran’s audiometric results provides a non-compensable rating under the schedular criteria, and therefore a compensable evaluation is not warranted for the entire period on appeal. In addition, there are not any extraordinary symptoms alleged by the Veteran that are not contemplated by the schedular criteria. Thus, a compensable rating for the Veteran’s bilateral hearing loss is denied. MATTHEW W. BLACKWELDER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Lutgens-Staley, Associate Counsel 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.