HEARING LOSS

ARDIE A. BLAND · 2026 · Case ID: A26040411

MIXED

Summary

The Veteran served from September 2009 to August 2014. This case involves appeals for service connection for right and left ear hearing loss, and increased ratings for right ankle scars. The Board granted service connection for right ear hearing loss, finding it related to in-service hazardous noise exposure, which was conceded by the RO based on the Veteran's MOS. The Veteran's right ear hearing loss met the VA criteria for a disability, and the Board found a nexus to service due to consistent complaints and lack of post-service noise exposure. Service connection for left ear hearing loss was denied because the audiometric tests did not meet the VA's definition of a disabling hearing loss, despite the Veteran's complaints and acknowledged in-service noise exposure. The claims for increased ratings for right ankle scars were denied. The Board found the scars did not meet the minimum area requirements for a compensable rating under DC 7801, and the Veteran's two painful scars did not meet the criteria for a rating higher than 10 percent under DC 7804, nor did they present any other disabling effects under DC 7805. The Board noted the Veteran's lay statements were credible but insufficient to overcome the evidence against the claims.

Rationale

Current disability met VA criteria (4000 Hz at 40 dB); In-service occurrence conceded due to MOS and hazardous noise exposure; Nexus found due to continuous complaints and no post-service noise exposure

Special Benefit

NO SPECIAL BENEFIT

Diagnostic Code

7804

Docket No.

210910-185503

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26040411
Decision Date: 04/29/26 Archive Date: 04/29/26

DOCKET NO. 210910-185503
DATE: April 29, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss is granted.

Entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss is denied.

Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scar status post-surgery with underlying tissue damage pursuant to Diagnostic Code (DC) 7801 (hereinafter, "right ankle scar tissue damage") is denied.

Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected painful right ankle scars, status post-surgery pursuant to DC 7804 (hereinafter, "painful right ankle scars") is denied.

Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scar status post-surgery pursuant to DC 7805 (hereinafter, "right ankle scars") is denied.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. The Veteran's right ear hearing loss is related to his in-service hazardous noise exposure.

2. The Veteran does not have a current left ear hearing loss disability that comports with VA's definition of a disability resulting from hearing impairment for compensation purposes.

3. The Veteran's right ankle scar tissue damage manifests in an area less than 6 sq. in. (39 sq. cm.).

4. The Veteran's painful right ankle scars manifest as two scars that are unstable or painful.

5. The disabling effects of the Veteran's right ankle scars are contemplated in ratings provided under DC 7801 and 7804.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1101, 1110, 1112, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.385.

2. The criteria for entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1101, 1110, 1112, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309, 3.385.

3. The criteria for entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scar tissue damage have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.118; DC 7801.

4. The criteria for entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected painful right ankle scars have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.118; DC 7804.

5. The criteria for entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scars have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1, 4.3, 4.7, 4.118; DC 7805.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

The Veteran served on active duty from September 2009 to August 2014.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2021 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ).

In the September 2021 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. A Board hearing was held on July 10, 2025. A copy of the transcript is included in the file.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the July 2021 AOJ decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or their representative at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801.

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran
of record at the time of the July 2021 AOJ decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or their representative at the hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.302(a). If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the Board hearing, or (2) more than 90 days following the hearing, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.302(a), 20.801.

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted 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.

Service Connection - Hearing Loss

Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Service connection also may be granted for any disease diagnosed after service, when all evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). To establish entitlement to service connection, there must be (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

Additionally, for Veterans who have served 90 days or more of active service during a war period or after December 31, 1946, certain chronic disabilities, such as organic diseases of the nervous system, to include bilateral hearing loss, are presumed to have been incurred in service, if manifested to a compensable degree within one year of discharge from service. 38 U.S.C. § 1101, 1112; 38 C.F.R. § 3.307, 3.309.

Alternatively, when a disease of 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) is not shown to be chronic during service or the one-year presumptive period, service connection may also be established by showing continuity of symptomatology after service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(b). However, the use of continuity of symptoms to establish service connection is limited to those diseases listed at 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a) and does not apply to other disabilities which might be considered chronic from a medical standpoint. See Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013).

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the Veteran. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-54 (1990).

Hearing loss (as an organic disease of the nervous system) is a "chronic disease" under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a), and as such, the presumptive service connection provisions based on "chronic" in-service symptoms and "continuous" post-service symptoms under 38 C.F.R. § 3.307 apply. Walker, 708 F.3d at 1331. Service connection for hearing loss may be granted where there is credible evidence of acoustic trauma due to significant noise exposure in service, post-service audiometric findings meeting the regulatory requirements for hearing loss disability for VA purposes, and a medically sound basis upon which to attribute the post-service findings to the injury in service (as opposed to intercurrent causes). Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 159 (1993). The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 do not preclude service connection for a current hearing disability even where hearing was within normal limits on audiometric testing at separation from service. Id. at 157; see also Ledford v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 87, 89 (1992) (38 C.F.R. §
exposure in service, post-service audiometric findings meeting the regulatory requirements for hearing loss disability for VA purposes, and a medically sound basis upon which to attribute the post-service findings to the injury in service (as opposed to intercurrent causes). Hensley v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 155, 159 (1993). The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.385 do not preclude service connection for a current hearing disability even where hearing was within normal limits on audiometric testing at separation from service. Id. at 157; see also Ledford v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 87, 89 (1992) (38 C.F.R. § 3.385 does "not serve as a bar to service connection" where there is an absence of results of an in-service audiometric examination capable of being compared with the regulatory puretone and speech recognition criteria).

For the purpose of applying the laws administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of these frequencies are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385.

1. Entitlement to service connection for right ear hearing loss is granted.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for his right ear hearing loss, specifically, as due to his in-service hazardous noise exposure.

As to the first element of service connection, the Board finds that the evidence of record shows a current disability of right ear hearing loss. The Veteran's right ear auditory threshold at 4000 Hertz was 40 decibels or greater. See June 2021 VA exam. Accordingly, the Veteran is considered to have right ear impaired hearing for VA purposes.

As to the second element of service connection, an in-service occurrence, the RO made a favorable finding in the July 2021 rating decision that the evidence of record shows that a qualifying event, injury, or disease had its onset during service. The RO conceded hazardous noise exposure during service based on the Veteran's MOS. The Board is bound by this favorable finding. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). Accordingly, the second element of service connection is met.

As to the third element of service connection, the Board finds that the evidence of record supports a finding of a nexus between the Veteran's current right ear hearing loss and his in-service hazardous noise exposure. The Veteran has consistently reported that his hearing loss began during service and that his symptoms have been continuous since that time. See July 2025 Hearing Transcript; June 2021 VA exam; December 2013 Report of Medical History. The Veteran also noted that he has not had any loud noise exposure since his time in service. See July 2025 Hearing Transcript; June 2021 VA exam. As such, the Board finds that the evidence supports a finding of a nexus, and the third element of service connection is met.

Accordingly, the Veteran is entitled to service connection for right ear hearing loss, and the claim is granted.

2. Entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to service connection for his left ear hearing loss, specifically, due to his in-service hazardous noise exposure.

The Board finds that the evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Veteran has a current left ear hearing loss disability that comports with VA's definition of a disability resulting from hearing impairment.

As noted above, for purposes of applying the laws administered by VA, impaired hearing will be considered to be a disability when the auditory threshold in any of the frequencies of 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, or 4000 Hertz is 40 decibels or greater; or when the auditory thresholds for at least three of these frequencies are 26 decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385.

The Veteran was afforded audiological examinations during service in September 2009 and July 2013; and after service in July 2017 and June 2021.

Sept. 2009 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 5 0 5 -5 10

July 2013 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 10 5 5 5 5

July 2017 500 Hz
decibels or greater; or when speech recognition scores using the Maryland CNC Test are less than 94 percent. 38 C.F.R. § 3.385.

The Veteran was afforded audiological examinations during service in September 2009 and July 2013; and after service in July 2017 and June 2021.

Sept. 2009 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 5 0 5 -5 10

July 2013 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 10 5 5 5 5

July 2017 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 10 10 5 5 5

June 2021 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 3000 Hz 4000 Hz

Left 10 10 10 5 15

Of note, the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) indicate that he had an additional audiological test during service in June 2012. However, the Board has been unable to locate the results of that test in the file.

The Veteran's auditory thresholds in all frequencies during each examination were less than 40 decibels, and the Veteran did not have at least three frequencies at 26 decibels or greater during any examination. Additionally, none of the Veteran's Maryland CNC Test scores were less than 94 percent. See July 2017 and June 2021 VA exams.

The Board acknowledges the Veteran's complaints of hearing loss in his left ear. However, the Veteran's hearing loss is at a level that is not considered to be a disability for VA purposes. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran experiences impaired hearing, but the test results do not meet the criteria to be considered a disability for VA purposes.

The Board additionally acknowledges the Veteran's in-service hazardous noise exposure, and that the Veteran's impaired hearing is likely due to such exposure.

However, entitlement to service connection also requires a current disability, in this case, hearing loss at a level that is considered to be a disability for VA purposes. The Board acknowledges the Veteran's impaired left ear hearing and is sympathetic to the Veteran's situation, but based on the evidence of record, the Veteran's left ear hearing loss does not meet the criteria to be considered a disability for VA purposes.

As such, the record establishes that the Veteran has no current left ear hearing loss considered disabling for VA purposes. The RO has conceded hazardous noise exposure while in service. However, in the absence of proof of a current disability for VA purposes, entitlement to service connection cannot be granted. See Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992).

Thus, the evidence is against a finding of a current left ear hearing loss disability for VA purposes, and therefore entitlement to service connection for a left ear hearing loss disability is not warranted. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303, 3.385. Therefore, the claim for entitlement to service connection for left ear hearing loss disability is denied.

Of note, if the Veteran would like VA to consider additional evidence, 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.

Increased Ratings

Disability evaluations are determined by the application of a schedule of ratings which is based on average impairment of earning capacity. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. Where there is a question as to which of 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. Any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability is resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3.

3. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scar tissue damage pursuant to DC 7801 is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to an increased rating for his service-connected right ankle scar tissue damage.

The Veteran's right ankle scar tissue damage is rated as noncompensable under DC 7801.

VA amended the criteria for rating skin disabilities effective from August 13, 2018. These new regulations apply to all applications for benefits received
that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability is resolved in favor of the Veteran. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3.

3. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scar tissue damage pursuant to DC 7801 is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to an increased rating for his service-connected right ankle scar tissue damage.

The Veteran's right ankle scar tissue damage is rated as noncompensable under DC 7801.

VA amended the criteria for rating skin disabilities effective from August 13, 2018. These new regulations apply to all applications for benefits received by VA or that are pending before the AOJ on or after August 13, 2018. Claims pending prior to the effective date will be considered under both old and new rating criteria, and whatever criteria is more favorable to the veteran will be applied. The Board may not apply a current regulation prior to its effective date, unless the regulation explicitly provides otherwise. Kuzma v. Principi, 341 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2003). However, the Board is not precluded from applying prior versions of the applicable regulation to the period on or after the effective dates of the new regulation if the prior version was in effect during the pendency of the appeal.

Since August 13, 2018, DC 7801 is for burn scar(s) or scar(s) due to other causes, not of the head, face, or neck, that are associated with underlying soft tissue damage. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118. DC 7801 was otherwise unchanged by the August 13, 2018, amendments.

Pursuant to DC 7801, scar(s) with an area(s) of at least 6 square inches (39 sq. cm.) but less than 12 sq. in. (77 sq. in.) warrants a 10 percent rating. Scar(s) with an area(s) of at least 12 sq. in. (77 sq. cm.) but less than 72 sq. in. (465 sq. cm.) warrants a 20 percent rating. Scar(s) with an area(s) of at least 72 sq. in. (465 sq. cm.) but less than 144 sq. in. (929 sq. cm.) warrants a 30 percent rating. Scar(s) with an area(s) of 144 sq. in. (929 sq. cm.) or greater warrant a 40 percent rating.

The Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the assignment of a compensable rating under DC 7801 because the Veteran's scars cover an area less than 6 sq. in. (39 sq. cm.).

The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in June 2021. One of the Veteran's scars measured 13 cm. by 1 cm., accordingly, 13 sq. cm. The Veteran's second scar measured 3 cm. by 2 cm., accordingly, 6 sq. cm. This equates to a total of 19 sq. cm., which is less than the required 39 sq. cm. to warrant a compensable rating under DC 7801.

The Board has also considered the other Diagnostic Codes pertaining to scars, which are discussed below.

The Board acknowledges that the Veteran believes that the disability on appeal has been more severe than the assigned disability rating reflects. Moreover, the Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms, to include lay reports of record, and these reports are credible. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). However, the Veteran does not assert, and medical records do not show that the Veteran's scars are manifest by an area or areas of at least 6 square inches (39 sq. cm.) but less than 12 square inches (77 sq. cm.).

In conclusion, the Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for right ankle scar tissue damage. As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against a compensable rating, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.3, 4.7; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

4. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected painful right ankle scars pursuant to DC 7804 is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to an increased rating for his service
that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for right ankle scar tissue damage. As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against a compensable rating, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.3, 4.7; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

4. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected painful right ankle scars pursuant to DC 7804 is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to an increased rating for his service-connected painful right ankle scars.

The Veteran's painful right ankle scars are rated as 10 percent disabling under DC 7804 for unstable or painful scar(s).

The Board notes that VA amended the criteria for rating skin disabilities effective from August 13, 2018. However, DC 7804 was not changed by the August 13, 2018, amendments.

Under DC 7804, one or two scars that are unstable or painful scars warrants a 10 percent rating. Three or four scars that are unstable or painful scars warrants a 20 percent rating. Five or more scars that are unstable or painful warrants a 30 percent rating. 38 C.F.R. § 4.118. Note 1 to DC 7804 instructs that an unstable scar is one where, for any reason, there is frequent loss of covering of skin over the scar. Id.

The Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the assignment of a rating in excess of 10 percent under DC 7804 because the Veteran's scar is not manifest by three or four scars that are unstable or painful.

The evidence of record reflects that the Veteran has two painful right ankle scars. See June 2021 VA exam; July 2025 Hearing Transcript. The evidence does not suggest that either of the scars are unstable. See June 2021 VA exam; July 2025 Hearing Transcript.

The Board has also considered the other Diagnostic Codes pertaining to scars, discussed herein.

The Board acknowledges that the Veteran believes that the disability on appeal has been more severe than the assigned disability rating reflects. Moreover, the Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms, to include lay reports of record, and these reports are credible. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). However, the Veteran does not assert, and medical records do not show, that the Veteran's painful right ankle scars are manifest by three or four scars that are unstable or painful.

In conclusion, the Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim for a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for painful right ankle scars. As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against a rating in excess of 10 percent, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.3, 4.7; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

5. Entitlement to a compensable rating for service-connected right ankle scars pursuant to DC 7805 is denied.

The Veteran contends that he is entitled to a compensable rating for his service-connected right ankle scars.

The Veteran's right ankle scars are rated under DC 7805 for other scars (including linear scars) and other effects of scars evaluated under DCs 7800, 7801, 7802, and 7804.

The Board notes that VA amended the criteria for rating skin disabilities effective from August 13, 2018. However, DC 7805 was not changed by the August 13, 2018, amendments.

DC 7805 instructs that any disabling effect(s) not considered in a rating provided under DCs 7800-04 under an appropriate DC.

The Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the assignment of a compensable rating for the Veteran's right ankle scars under DC 7805 as there are no other disabling effect(s) not considered in a rating provided under DC 7800-04. As discussed above, the Veteran is rated pursuant to DCs 7801 and 7804 for the amount of scars (two) and for his painful scars.

The Board acknowledges that the Veteran believes that the disability on appeal has been more severe than the assigned disability rating reflects. Moreover, the Veteran is competent to report observable symptoms, to include lay reports of record, and these reports are credible. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007). However, the Veteran does not assert, and medical records do not show, that the Veteran's right ankle scars are manifest by any disabling effect(s) not considered in a rating provided under DCs 7800-04.

In conclusion, the Board finds that the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the Veteran's claim for a compensable rating for right ankle scars. As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against a compensable rating, the benefit-of-the-doubt rule does not apply. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.3, 4.7; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021).

Ardie A. Bland

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board A. O'Meara, 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.

Analyze in VA Law Explorer