Citation Nr: A25094271 Decision Date: 10/30/25 Archive Date: 10/30/25 DOCKET NO. 240725-459733 DATE: October 30, 2025 ORDER Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for the service-connected bilateral hearing loss is denied. FINDING OF FACT The medical evidence shows audiometric results consistent with, at worst, Level II hearing on the right side and Level I hearing on the left side. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an initial compensable rating for the service-connected bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code 6100. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from November 1990 to November 1993. In the July 25, 2024 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Evidence Submission docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the August 2023 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision, which was subsequently subject to higher-level review in January 2024, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran with, or within 90 days from receipt of, the VA Form 10182. 38 C.F.R. § 20.303. Here, the Veteran's attorney submitted argument in September 2024, which the Board considered. However, no further evidence was submitted by the Veteran or representative within the 90-day period relevant to rating hearing loss. If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision, which was subsequently subject to higher-level review and prior to the date the Board received the VA Form 10182, or (2) more than 90 days following the date the Board received the VA Form 10182, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.303, 20.801. If there is evidence the Board could not consider with respect to this claim that the Veteran would like VA to consider, he can submit a supplemental claim. Instructions for doing so are attached to this decision. The Veteran seeks a compensable rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing loss. The appeal period stems from April 13, 2022, the effective date for his award of service connection. He was afforded a VA hearing loss examination in March 2023. Audiometric testing revealed the following pure tone thresholds, in decibels, for the right ear: 25 (500 Hz); 25 (1000 Hz); 25 (2000 Hz); 30 (3000 Hz); and 40 (4000 Hz). His left ear pure tone thresholds were as follows: 30 (500Hz); 25 (1000 Hz); 35 (2000 Hz); 50 (3000 Hz); and 60 (4000 Hz). His average pure tone threshold was 30 decibels in the right ear and 43 decibels in the left ear. His speech discrimination score was 86 percent in the right ear and 100 percent in the left ear. After review of the lay and medical evidence, the Board finds that the Veteran's hearing loss does not warrant a compensable rating for the entire period on appeal. In making this determination, the Board found the VA examination highly probative as it contained the necessary objective test results. The March 2023 VA examination shows that the right ear's pure tone threshold average was 30 and the speech discrimination score was 86 percent, a combination that warrants a 'II' numeric designation pursuant to Table VI. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Diagnostic Code 6100, Table VI. The left ear's pure tone threshold average was 43 and the speech discrimination score was 100 percent, a combination that warrants a 'I' numeric designation pursuant to Table VI. See id. Pursuant to Table VII, after entering the Veteran's right ear and left ear numeric designations, the Veteran is entitled to a 0 percent rating. Id. at Table VII. Because the examination does not show an exceptional pattern of hearing impairment, 38 C.F.R. § 4.86 does not apply. The Board considered the September 2024 argument that he is entitled to a higher rating for hearing loss under 38 C.F.R. § 4.7 because his hearing loss causes functional impairment. Section 4.7 only applies "[w]here there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied." 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Disability ratings for hearing impairment are derived by a mechanical application of audiometric evaluation results to the rating schedule, which contemplate functional impairment caused by hearing loss. See Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345, 349 (1992). Accordingly, there is no question raised by the medical evidence that a compensable rating may be appropriate in this case, and a higher rating is not available under 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. In other words, while § 4.7 applies to all VA adjudications, the audiometric results here do not raise the question of whether a noncompensable or compensable rating is warranted, as they squarely fall within the criteria for a noncompensable rating. The Veteran's attorney cited caselaw regarding extraschedular ratings in the September 2024 argument. Although he did not explicitly raise an argument for an extraschedular rating, the Board finds that an extraschedular rating is not warranted because the rating criteria for hearing loss reasonably account for the Veteran's reported symptoms. See Thun v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 111, 115-16 (2008) (holding that the first of the three-step extraschedular analysis is determining whether the rating criteria reasonably account for the claimant's symptoms). Difficulty communicating at work and in personal life due to hearing impairment is exactly the type of symptomatology and resulting functional impairment that is contemplated by the rating criteria for hearing loss. Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 371 (2017). Accordingly, an extraschedular rating is not warranted. See Thun, 22 Vet. App. at 115-16. The Board thus finds that the Veteran is not entitled to a compensable rating for his hearing loss, and the claim is denied. MICHELLE L. KANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Lavan 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.