Citation Nr: 21003922 Decision Date: 01/25/21 Archive Date: 01/25/21 DOCKET NO. 17-06 852 DATE: January 25, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT Audiological evidence demonstrates that, for the period on appeal, the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral hearing loss has been manifested by, at worst, Level II hearing acuity in each ear, with no exceptional hearing loss pattern shown in either ear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.85, 4.86, DC 6100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1968 to May 1971. This current matter returns to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a November 2019 Board remand for further evidentiary development. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss The Veteran is service connected for bilateral hearing loss with an assigned noncompensable rating. He contends that, because his hearing has worsened and requires use of a hearing aid, he is entitled to a compensable rating. Unfortunately, the Board finds that the Veteran’s hearing loss does not warrant a higher rating under 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, DC 6100. Evaluations for hearing loss range from noncompensable to 100 percent based on organic impairment of hearing acuity as measured by the results of controlled speech discrimination tests in conjunction 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. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. “Pure tone threshold average” is the sum of the pure tone thresholds at 1000, 2000, 3000 and 4000 Hertz (Hz) divided by four. This average is used in all cases (including those in §4.86) to determine the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment from Table VI or VIA. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, DC 6100. To evaluate the degree of disability from the Veteran’s hearing loss; the rating schedule establishes 11 auditory acuity levels, designated from Level I for slightly impaired hearing acuity through Level XI for profound deafness. Schedular 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.” Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349 (1992). In Martinak v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 447 (2007), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that, in addition to dictating objective test results, a VA audiologist must fully describe the functional effects caused by a hearing disability in his or her final report. Martinak, 21 Vet. App. at 455. Even if, however, an audiologist’s description of the functional effects of a veteran’s hearing disability was somehow defective, the veteran bears the burden of demonstrating any prejudice caused by a deficiency in the examination. Id. For purposes of determining the appropriate rating for the period on appeal for the Veteran’s service-connected hearing loss, his audiological testing results from various examinations must be evaluated under the appropriate Hearing Impairment Tables provided in 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. At an August 2015 VA audiological examination, puretone thresholds (in decibels) in the Veteran’s right ear were 25, 55, 70, and 65 at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz, respectively. For his left ear, the pure tone thresholds were 25, 50, 90, and 105+. The frequency average was 54 decibels in the Veteran’s right ear and 68 in his left ear. Maryland CNC speech discrimination test results were 96 percent in his right ear and 100 percent in his left ear. These audiological results reflect hearing loss impairment of Level I in the Veteran’s right ear and Level II in his left ear, which support a noncompensable evaluation under 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Table VII. An exceptional hearing loss pattern was not shown in either ear. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86. Pursuant to the November 2019 Board remand, the Veteran underwent another VA audiological examination in December 2019. The audiometric study completed at that time showed pure tone thresholds of 40, 60, 70, and 75 at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz, respectively, in the Veteran’s right ear and puretone thresholds of 30, 60, 95, and 100+ in his left ear. The frequency average was 61 decibels in the Veteran’s right ear and 71 in his left ear. Maryland CNC speech discrimination test results were 96 percent in both his right and left ears. These results reflect in a numeric designation of Level II in each ear, which correspond to a noncompensable evaluation. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Table VII. An exceptional hearing loss pattern was not shown in either ear. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran has been issued hearing aids and contends that his hearing abilities have worsened. However, the results of the August 2015 and December 2019 VA examinations show that his bilateral hearing loss disability does not warrant a compensable evaluation. Therefore, the Board finds that a compensable rating is not warranted, and the appeal is denied. To the extent that the Veteran contends that his hearing loss is more severe, the Board finds that, while competent to report symptoms such as difficulty in hearing the television, telephone conversations, or friends and family, he is not competent to report that his hearing acuity is of sufficient severity as to warrant a higher compensable evaluation under VA’s tables for rating hearing loss disabilities because such an opinion requires medical expertise (training in evaluating hearing impairment), which he has not been shown to have. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Indeed, even after considering such contentions as to the effects of the disability on his daily life, the Board finds that the criteria for an evaluation of a compensable rating are not met. Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (1992). THERESA M. CATINO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. R. Bobb, 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.