HEARING LOSS

P.M. DILORENZO · 2026 · Case ID: A26040281

MIXED

Summary

The veteran, who served from March 1982 to March 1984, appeals the denial of an increased disability rating for service-connected bilateral hearing loss and the grant of a separate 30 percent rating for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) associated with his hearing loss. The Board reviewed the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for bilateral hearing loss, noting that the audiometric testing showed a 0 percent rating under both Table VI and Table VIA of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities. The Board found the evidence weighed against entitlement to a rating higher than 20 percent, denying the increased rating claim. For the BPPV claim, the Veteran testified to experiencing 5-7 episodes of vertigo weekly, including dizziness, nausea, spinning, lightheadedness, and staggering 3-5 times a week. The Board found the Veteran's testimony credible and consistent with the criteria for dizziness and occasional staggering under Diagnostic Code 6204. Therefore, the Board granted a separate 30 percent rating for BPPV associated with his hearing loss, which is the maximum schedular rating for this condition.

Rationale

Audiometric testing showed a 0 percent rating under Tables VI and VIA.; Evidence weighs against entitlement to a rating higher than 20 percent.; Rating criteria contemplate Veteran's disability levels and symptomatology.

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Docket No.

210503-157406

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040281
Decision Date: 04/29/26 Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 210503-157406
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent disabling for service-connected bilateral hearing loss is denied.

Entitlement to a separate 30 percent disability rating for benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) associated with bilateral hearing loss is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was manifested by no worse than a Level IX hearing impairment in the right ear and a Level I hearing impairment in the left ear.

2. The Veteran's BPPV is manifested by dizziness and occasional staggering.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent disabling for service-connected bilateral hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.85, 4.86, Diagnostic Code 6100.

2. The criteria for entitlement to a separate 30 percent disability rating for BPPV associated with bilateral hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.321, 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.87, Diagnostic Code 6204.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1982 to March 1984.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2020 Rating Decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).

In May 2021, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 10182 electing a Hearing with a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) as the review option. The Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned VLJ in November 2024.

Based on the Veteran's election, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the December 2020 rating decision as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his representative within 90 days of his November 2024 hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302.

Any additional evidence associated with the claims file during a period of time when additional evidence was not allowed has not been considered. If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was added to the claims file that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claims, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision.

1. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent disabling for service-connected bilateral hearing loss is denied.

The Veteran submitted a VA Form 21-526EZ seeking a higher rating for his service-connected bilateral hearing on May 8, 2020.

Disability evaluations are determined by the application of the VA's Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule), 38 C.F.R. Part 4. The percentage ratings in the Rating Schedule represent, as far as can be practicably determined, the average impairment in earning capacity resulting from diseases and injuries incurred or aggravated during military service and their residual conditions in civil occupations. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1.

Where entitlement to compensation has already been established and increase in disability rating is at issue, present level of disability is of primary concern. See Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55, 58 (1994).

Because the level of disability may have varied over the course of the claim, the rating may be "staged" higher or lower for segments of time during the period under review in accordance with such variations, to the extent they are sufficient to warrant changes in the evaluations assignable under the applicable rating criteria. See Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505, 509-10 (2007); Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119, 126 (1999). For increased-rating claims, where a claimant seeks a higher evaluation for a previously service-connected disability, it is the present level
. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55, 58 (1994).

Where there is a question as to which of the two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7.

Evaluations of defective hearing range from noncompensable 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. To evaluate the degree of disability from defective hearing, the 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, Diagnostic Code 6100. Disability ratings for hearing loss are derived from a mechanical application of the rating schedule to the numeric designations resulting from audiometric testing. See Lendenmann v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (1992).

There are alternative criteria for certain exceptional patterns of hearing loss. Specifically, if puretone thresholds in each of the specified frequencies of 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hertz are 55 decibels or more, an evaluation will be based either on Table VI or Table VIa in 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, whichever results in a higher evaluation. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86(a). Each ear will be evaluated separately. Id.

When the puretone threshold is 30 decibels or less at 1000 Hertz and 70 decibels or more at 2000 Hertz, the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment will be chosen from either Table VI or Table VIa under 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, whichever results in the higher Roman numeral, and that numeral will then be elevated to the next higher numeral. 38 C.F.R. § 4.86(b).

For the relevant period on appeal, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in November 2020 to determine the severity of his bilateral hearing loss. On the authorized audiological VA evaluation, puretone thresholds, in decibels, were as follows:

HERTZ 1000 2000 3000 4000 Avg

LEFT 45 50 60 65 55

RIGHT 70 80 110 110 92.5

Speech audiometry revealed speech recognition ability of 92 percent in the left ear and 76 percent in the right ear. Because the examination shows puretone threshold at each of the four specified frequencies of 55 decibels or more in the right ear, the Veteran had an exceptional pattern of hearing impairment in that ear. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.86. Therefore, the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment is determined from either Table VI or Table VIa, whichever results in the higher numeral. See id.

Applying these values to Table VI yields a numeric designation of I for the left ear and V for the right ear. The point where designations I and V intersect on Table VII yields a 0 percent rating.

Applying these values to Table VIA for the right ear, the puretone threshold average of 92.5 for the right ear is assigned Level IX Roman numeral designation. The point where designation I and IX intersect on Table VII yields a 0 percent rating.

Accordingly, the Veteran's hearing impairment results in a 0 percent rating
4.86. Therefore, the Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment is determined from either Table VI or Table VIa, whichever results in the higher numeral. See id.

Applying these values to Table VI yields a numeric designation of I for the left ear and V for the right ear. The point where designations I and V intersect on Table VII yields a 0 percent rating.

Accordingly, the Veteran's hearing impairment results in a 0 percent rating under both Table VI and Table VIA. Accordingly, the evidence weighs persuasively against entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent disability for the Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss.

Because disability ratings for hearing impairment are derived by a mechanical application of the Rating Schedule to the numeric designations assigned after audiometry evaluations are rendered, there is no doubt as to the proper evaluations to assign. Lendenmann, 3 Vet. App. at 345; 38 C.F.R. § 4.85, Tables VI and VII, Diagnostic Code 6100. Thus, when applying the audiological examination test results described above under the Rating Schedule, the Board is compelled to find against entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent disabling for the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss.

The Veteran reported difficulty hearing and understanding as the main problem related his hearing loss disability. See November 2020 VA Examination. He testified that he often had to ask others to repeat themselves and that he could not hear his wife yelling from the other room. See November 2024 Hearing Transcript. The Board sincerely empathizes with the Veteran. However, when a claimant's hearing loss results in an inability to hear or understand speech or to hear other sounds in various contexts, those effects are contemplated by the schedular rating criteria. Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369 (2017).

Accordingly, the Veteran's complaints of hearing difficulty are considered under the numerical criteria set forth in the rating schedule. In short, the rating criteria reasonably contemplate his disability levels and symptomatology, and the Veteran has not established that his hearing loss presents such an exceptional or unusual disability picture as to render the Rating Schedule inadequate for assigning an appropriate disability evaluation. 38 C.F.R. § 3.321(b)(1).

Because the evidence persuasively weighs against a rating higher than 20 percent, the Veteran's claim for an increased rating for his bilateral hearing loss must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

2. Entitlement to a separate 30 percent disability rating for BPPV associated with bilateral hearing loss is granted.

In a May 2020 VA Form 21-526EZ, the Veteran applied for service connection for vertigo and dizziness associated with his service-connected hearing loss.

In the December 2020 AOJ decision on appeal, the AOJ recharacterized the Veteran's disability as bilateral hearing loss with BPPV and continued the 20 rating under Diagnostic Code (DC) 6204-6100. The Veteran contends that a separate rating is warranted for his vertigo under DC 6204. See May 2021 VA Form 10182.

For the following reasons, the Board finds that the criteria for a separate rating of 30 percent, but no higher, for BPPV associated with the Veteran's service-connected bilateral hearing loss have been satisfied. See Diagnostic Code 6204.

Diagnostic Code 6204 applies to peripheral vestibular disorders and provides for a 10 percent evaluation for occasional dizziness and a maximum 30 percent evaluation for dizziness and occasional staggering. 38 C.F.R. § 4.87, Diagnostic Code 6204. A note to this Diagnostic Code states that objective findings supporting the diagnosis of vestibular disequilibrium are required before a compensable evaluation can be assigned under this code. Hearing impairment or suppuration shall be separately rated and combined.

The October 2020 Ear Conditions DBQ noted a diagnosis of BPPV. In this examination, the Veteran reported episodes of vertigo occurring more than once weekly and lasting less than 1 hour.

At his November 2024 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that he experienced 5 to 7 episodes of vertigo each week. He described his symptoms as dizziness, nausea, spinning, lightheadedness, and feeling as if he was going to faint. He testified that during an episode, if he has to get up from a couch or bed, he has to do it
disequilibrium are required before a compensable evaluation can be assigned under this code. Hearing impairment or suppuration shall be separately rated and combined.

The October 2020 Ear Conditions DBQ noted a diagnosis of BPPV. In this examination, the Veteran reported episodes of vertigo occurring more than once weekly and lasting less than 1 hour.

At his November 2024 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that he experienced 5 to 7 episodes of vertigo each week. He described his symptoms as dizziness, nausea, spinning, lightheadedness, and feeling as if he was going to faint. He testified that during an episode, if he has to get up from a couch or bed, he has to do it very slowly and find a table or chair to lean against/grasp so that he does not fall. He stated that he staggers about 3 to 5 times a week from his vertigo.

The Board finds that the Veteran is competent to describe the sensations he experiences during episodes of vertigo. See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469-71 (1994). The Board also finds his descriptions to be credible.

Accordingly, the Board finds that the Veteran's manifestations of vertigo including dizziness, nausea, spinning, lightheadedness, feeling as if he is going to faint, needing support to get up from a chair/bed, and staggering 3-5 times a week are consistent with dizziness and occasional staggering. Thus, the Board finds a separate 30 percent rating is warranted for the Veteran's BPPV. This is the highest schedular rating available under Diagnostic Code 6204. Therefore, a rating in excess of 30 percent is not warranted.

P.M. DILORENZO

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board Mohammad, Tahmina

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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer