Citation Nr: 21077457 Decision Date: 12/29/21 Archive Date: 12/29/21 DOCKET NO. 16-29 019 DATE: December 29, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT Throughout the period on appeal, the Veteran's hearing impairment has been no worse than Level I hearing acuity in the right ear and Level I hearing acuity in the left ear. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7, 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code 6100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from October 1971 to October 1974; and from March 1975 to November 1980. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) from an appeal of a February 2015 rating decision from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board previously remanded this case for additional development in October 2018 and August 2021. The directives have been substantially complied with and the matter is again properly before the Board. D'Aries v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 97, 105 (2008); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Entitlement to an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss Disability evaluations are determined by comparing a Veteran's present symptomatology with criteria set forth in the VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule), which is based on average impairment in earning capacity. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. Part 4. When a question arises as to which of two ratings apply under a particular diagnostic code, the higher evaluation is assigned if the disability more closely approximates the criteria for the higher rating. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. After careful consideration of the evidence, any reasonable doubt remaining is resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. The Veteran's entire history is reviewed when making disability evaluations. See generally 38 C.F.R. § 4.1; Schafrath v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 589 (1995). The Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss has been evaluated as noncompensable under the provisions of Diagnostic Code 6100. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. In evaluating hearing loss under the schedular criteria, disability ratings are derived by a mechanical application of the ratings schedule to the numeric designations assigned after audiometric evaluations are rendered. See Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349 (1992). The ratings schedule provides a table for ratings purposes (Table VI) to determine a Roman numeral designation (I through XI) for hearing impairment. Table VII is used to determine the percentage evaluation by combining the Roman numeral designations for hearing impairment in both ears. 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. When the pure tone threshold at each of the four specified frequencies (1,000, 2,000, 3,000, and 4,000 Hertz) is 55 decibels or more, Table VI or Table VIa is to be used, whichever results in the higher numeral. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 (a). Additionally, when the pure tone threshold is 30 decibels or less at 1,000 Hertz, and 70 decibels or more at 2,000 Hertz, Table VI or Table VIa is to be used, whichever results in the higher numeral. Thereafter, that numeral will be elevated to the next higher numeral. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 (b). Turning to the record, in January 2015, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination to determine the severity of his bilateral hearing loss. At the time of the examination, pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT NA 20 40 70 70 LEFT NA 20 55 70 70 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 92 percent in the right ear and of 88 in the left ear. The average decibel loss was 50 in the right ear and 54 in the left ear. Entering the average pure tone thresholds and speech recognition abilities into Table VI or Table VIa reveals the highest numeric designation of hearing impairment is I for right ear and II for left ear. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. Entering the category designations for each ear into Table VII does not result in a compensable evaluation under Diagnostic Code 6100. Next, another VA examination was conducted in October 2019. At the time of the examination, pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT NA 20 55 65 60 LEFT NA 25 75 65 60 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 100 percent in the right ear and of 100 percent in the left ear. The average decibel loss was 50 in the right ear and 56 in the left ear. Entering the average pure tone thresholds and speech recognition abilities into Table VI or Table VIa reveals the highest numeric designation of hearing impairment is I for right ear and I for left ear. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. Entering the category designations for each ear into Table VII does not result in a compensable evaluation under Diagnostic Code 6100. In February 2020, an additional VA examination was conducted in connection with the Veteran's claim. At the time of the examination, pure tone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows: HERTZ 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 RIGHT NA 35 55 65 65 LEFT NA 35 70 70 60 Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 92 percent in the right ear and of 84 percent in the left ear. The average decibel loss was 55 in the right ear and 59 in the left ear. Entering the average pure tone thresholds and speech recognition abilities into Table VI or Table VIa reveals the highest numeric designation of hearing impairment is I for right ear and III for left ear. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85. Entering the category designations for each ear into Table VII does not result in a compensable evaluation under Diagnostic Code 6100. The Board acknowledges the Veteran's contentions that his service-connected bilateral hearing loss warrants a compensable evaluation. However, in determining the actual degree of disability, an objective examination is more probative of the degree of the Veteran's impairment. Furthermore, the opinions and observations of the Veteran alone cannot meet the burden imposed by the rating criteria under 38 C.F.R. § 4.85 with respect to determining the severity of his service-connected hearing loss. See Moray v. Brown, 2 Vet. App. 211, 214 (1993); see also Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (2009). The Board finds that even though the Veteran underwent an audiology test during the appeal period, there is no audiological evidence of record to support a compensable evaluation for the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss at any point during the appeal period. The preponderance of the evidence is against his claim for an increased evaluation. Neither the Veteran nor his representative has raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 36970 (2017). Consequently, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b) (2012); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55 (U.S. 1990). CHRISTOPHER A. WENDELL Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Scanlan, 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.