Citation Nr: 21075059 Decision Date: 12/17/21 Archive Date: 12/17/21 DOCKET NO. 20-12 546 DATE: December 17, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT Bilateral hearing loss disability has been manifested by hearing acuity of no worse than Level I in either ear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss disability have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107 (2018); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.7, 4.85, Diagnostic Code 6100 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from August 1966 to June 1968. This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2018 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Increased Rating - Bilateral Hearing Loss The Veteran has asserted that he should have a higher rating for his bilateral hearing loss disability as his symptoms are worse than those contemplated by the currently assigned noncompensable rating. At an October 2018 VA audiology evaluation, the Veteran reported that his hearing loss impacted his daily life in that his family complained about how loud he kept the volume on his television. Audiometric testing results at that time were as follows: HERTZ 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz Average RIGHT 30 35 45 70 45 LEFT 25 40 50 60 43.75 Speech recognition was measured at 96 percent in the right ear and 98 percent in the left ear. Applying those values to the rating criteria results in a numeric designation of Level I in both ears. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Table VI. Application of the level of hearing impairment to Table VII produces a noncompensable (0 percent) rating. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 (2020). There are no additional audiometric test results or records found in the Veteran's file. The Board finds that the Veteran is not entitled to an initial compensable rating for his bilateral hearing loss disability. In this regard, the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss disability resulted in hearing impairment that was no worse than Level I in either ear. Those results fall squarely within the schedular rating criteria for a noncompensable rating. 38 C.F.R. § 4.485, Diagnostic Code 6100. Consideration has been given to assigning staged ratings. However, at no time during the period in question has the disability warranted a higher schedular rating than that assigned. Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007). Additionally, the Board has considered the evidence of record showing that the Veteran believes his hearing loss is getting worse and that he has trouble hearing things when there is background noise. The Veteran also indicates he requires the television, radio, and phone to be very loud in order to hear them. While the Board finds those statements to be credible, it finds that they do not provide sufficient evidence on which to award a higher rating for bilateral hearing loss disability. 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. 349 (1992). In this case, as noted above, the numeric designations correlate to no greater than a noncompensable rating. Accordingly, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim and entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss disability is not warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Andrew Ledman II 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.