08-26 005, 08-26 005

Veteran served active duty May 1968–Mar 1970; recipient of Combat Infantryman Badge and Purple Heart.
Claim: entitlement to a compensable VA rating for service‑connected bilateral hearing loss; appeal from July 2013 RO decision.
Record includes private audiogram (May 2007) and VA audiograms (Sept 2012, June 2013, July 2017) with pure‑tone averages ~37.5–49 dB and speech discrimination 84–89%.
VA examiners diagnosed bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and provided rationale; July 2017 exam concluded no impact on ordinary conditions of daily life.
Rating via DC 6100 (38 C.F.R. §§ 4.85, 4.86) requires mechanical application of audiometric results to Tables VI/VII; July 2017 results corresponded to Level II/Level II, producing a 0% (non‑compensable) evaluation.
Board found VA satisfied VCAA duties (notification, records, examinations) and that the preponderance of evidence weighs against a compensable rating; denied increased (compensable) rating.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Entitlement to a compensable rating for bilateral hearing loss	Hearing loss worsened; issuance of hearing aids and subjective difficulty understanding speech shows compensable disability	VA relies on objective audiometric results and DC 6100 application; exams valid and adequate	Denied — audiometric results map to non‑compensable rating under DC 6100

McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (explains VA's duty to assist and when medical opinions/exams are required)
Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303 (examinations must be adequate and provide rationale)
Monzingo v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 97 (examination adequate when it informs Board of expert judgment and essential rationale)
Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372 (competency of lay testimony on observable symptoms)
Lendenmen v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 345 (hearing impairment evaluations under DC 6100 are mechanical applications of audiometric results)
Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (requirement to consider staged ratings for increased rating claims)
Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366 (Board not required to address issues not raised by claimant or reasonably raised by record)