United States Department of Labor 

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

__________________________________________ 

E.W., Appellant 

and 

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, 

PORTSMOUTH NAVAL SHIPYARD, 

Portsmouth, NH, Employer 

__________________________________________ 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Docket No. 17-1022 

Issued: July 24, 2017 

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director 

DECISION AND ORDER 

Before: 

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge 

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge 

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge 

JURISDICTION 

On April 10, 2017 appellant filed a timely appeal from a December 30, 2016 merit 

decision of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs (OWCP). Pursuant to the Federal 

Employees’ Compensation Act1

 (FECA) and 20 C.F.R. §§ 501.2(c) and 501.3, the Board has 

jurisdiction over the merits of the claim. 

ISSUE 

The issue is whether appellant met his burden of proof to establish a ratable hearing loss 

for purposes of a schedule award. 

FACTUAL HISTORY 

On February 19, 2016 appellant, then a 64-year-old mechanical shop supervisor, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) for bilateral hearing loss which he attributed to daily 

 1

 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq. 
2

exposure to loud noises in the workplace.2

 He indicated that he first became aware of his 

condition and its work-related nature on January 18, 2014. OWCP received appellant’s 

employee health records, including hearing conservation data and audiograms dating back to 

September 1977. 

On August 31, 2016 Dr. David Thompson, a Board-certified otolaryngologist and OWCP 

referral physician, examined appellant and administered an audiogram. He diagnosed bilateral 

“noise-induced” high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss. Dr. Thompson indicated that 

appellant’s workplace exposure was of sufficient intensity and duration to have caused the 

demonstrated hearing loss. He further commented that appellant’s abrupt high-frequency loss 

was inconsistent with age-related hearing loss. 

By decision dated October 25, 2016, OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for bilateral 

sensorineural hearing loss, with a January 18, 2014 date of injury. Additionally, it advised him 

to file a claim for a schedule award (Form CA-7), noting that the medical evidence of record 

“establishe[d] that [he had] permanent partial impairment as a result of [his] employment-related 

hearing loss.” 

On November 28, 2016 appellant filed a claim for a schedule award (Form CA-7). 

On December 14, 2016 OWCP referred the case record, including Dr. Thompson’s 

August 31, 2016 report, to its district medical adviser (DMA) to determine whether appellant had 

a ratable hearing loss under the American Medical Association, Guides to the Evaluation of 

Permanent Impairment (6th ed. 2009) (hereinafter A.M.A., Guides). 

In a December 20, 2016 report, Dr. Jeffrey M. Israel, a Board-certified otolaryngologist 

and OWCP medical adviser, reviewed appellant’s records, a May 26, 2016 statement of accepted 

facts, and Dr. Thompson’s August 31, 2016 report. He noted that the earliest audiograms in the 

record, dated 1977 to 1992, showed normal hearing bilaterally, but serial audiograms thereafter 

showed a progressive high-frequency sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Dr. Israel further 

noted that the latest audiogram, dated August 31, 2016, revealed normal hearing bilaterally from 

250 Hz to 2 KHz. From there, both ears drop to a 6 KHz acoustic notch at 50 dB (moderate) 

with recovery to 45 dB at 8 KHz. Dr. Israel opined that the patterns were suggestive of an 

SNHL due at least in part to noise-induced, work-related acoustic trauma. He further found that 

hearing impairment calculated under the A.M.A., Guides (6th ed. 2009) revealed a bilateral 

monaural loss of zero, as well as a binaural loss of zero. The December 20, 2016 report included 

hearing loss impairment calculations based on the August 31, 2016 audiogram results.3

 

 2

 In his current position as a general foreman, appellant indicated that since 1989 he had been exposed to noise 

approximately two to three hours per day. This included noise from welding, grinding, impact wrenches, sand 

blasting, high-pressure air testing, and general industrial process noise. Appellant also explained that some hours 

were spent in confined spaces where the noise was dramatically amplified. He further indicated that he wore 

earplugs when required. 

3

 The August 31, 2016 audiogram noted losses at the frequencies of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 hertz (Hz). The 

right ear losses were recorded as 20, 15, 10 and 35 decibels (dB). The left ear losses were recorded as 5, 5, 10 and 

35 dB. 
3

Dr. Israel also indicated that there were no other hearing impairment calculations in the record 

with which to compare. 

In a December 30, 2016 decision, OWCP determined that appellant was not entitled to a 

schedule award. It found the medical evidence of record did not establish that appellant’s 

hearing loss was severe enough to be considered ratable under the A.M.A., Guides. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT 

Section 8107 of FECA sets forth the number of weeks of compensation to be paid for the 

permanent loss of use of specified members, functions and organs of the body.4

 FECA, 

however, does not specify the manner by which the percentage loss of a member, function or 

organ shall be determined. To ensure consistent results and equal justice under the law, good 

administrative practice requires the use of uniform standards applicable to all claimants. The 

implementing regulations have adopted the A.M.A., Guides as the appropriate standard for 

evaluating schedule losses.5

 Effective May 1, 2009, schedule awards are determined in 

accordance with the sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides (2009).6

The method of evaluating permanent impairment due to hearing loss is set forth under 

Chapter 11, Section 11.2, Hearing and Tinnitus, A.M.A., Guides at 248-51 (6th ed. 2009). Using 

the frequencies of 500, 1,000, 2,000 and 3,000 Hz, the losses at each frequency are added up and 

averaged.7 Then, the “fence” of 25 dB is deducted because, as the A.M.A., Guides points out, 

losses below 25 dB result in no impairment in the ability to hear everyday speech under everyday 

conditions.8 The remaining amount is multiplied by a factor of 1.5 to arrive at the percentage of 

monaural hearing loss.9 The binaural loss is determined by calculating the loss in each ear using 

the formula for monaural loss; the lesser loss is multiplied by five, and then added to the greater 

loss and the total is divided by six to arrive at the amount of the binaural hearing loss.10

ANALYSIS 

The Board finds that the case is not in posture for decision regarding whether appellant 

met his burden of proof to establish a ratable hearing loss for schedule award purposes. 

 4

 For complete loss of hearing of one ear, an employee shall receive 52 weeks’ compensation. 5 U.S.C. 

§ 8107(c)(13). For complete loss of hearing of both ears, an employee shall receive 200 weeks’ compensation. Id.

5

 20 C.F.R. § 10.404. 

6 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 3 -- Medical, Schedule Awards, Chapter 3.700, Exhibit 1 

(January 2010); Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Schedule Awards and Permanent Disability 

Claims, Chapter 2.808.6a (February 2013). 

7

 A.M.A., Guides 250 (6th ed. 2009). 

8 Id. at 250-51. 

 9 Id.

10 Id.
4

In deciding matters pertaining to a given claimant’s entitlement to FECA benefits, 

OWCP is required both by statute and regulation to make findings of fact.11 The procedure 

manual further specifies that a final decision of OWCP “should be clear and detailed so that the 

reader understands the reason for the disallowance of the benefit and the evidence necessary to 

overcome the defect of the claim.”12 

In its December 30, 2016 decision denying appellant’s claim for a schedule award, 

OWCP similarly concluded without explanation that the medical evidence revealed that his 

hearing loss was not severe enough to be considered ratable under the A.M.A., Guides. The 

decision did not specify what medical evidence OWCP considered or how or why the evidence 

of record was deemed insufficient to establish entitlement to a schedule award for hearing loss. 

As noted, an OWCP decision “shall contain findings of fact and a statement of reasons.”13 

Moreover, the procedure manual provides that a formal schedule award denial should include a 

full discussion of the weight of medical evidence used to determine that the impairment was zero 

percent, and therefore, a schedule award was not payable.14 Because OWCP’s December 30, 

2016 decision does not fully comply with statutory and regulatory requirements, the decision will 

be set aside.15 Accordingly, the case shall be remanded for a proper review of the evidence and 

issuance of a de novo decision. 

CONCLUSION 

The case is not in posture for decision. 

 11 Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8124(a), OWCP “shall determine and make a finding of facts and make an award for or 

against payment of compensation.” Additionally, 20 C.F.R. § 10.126 provides in pertinent part that the final 

decision of OWCP “shall contain findings of fact and a statement of reasons.” 

12 See Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, supra note 6 at Chapter 2.1400.5c(3)(e) (February 2013). See also 

D.K., Docket No. 15-1769 (issued April 4, 2016); G.J., Docket No. 14-528 (issued October 16, 2014). 

13 20 C.F.R. § 10.126. 

14 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, supra note 6 at Chapter 2.808.8e(2). 

15 20 C.F.R. § 10.126; 5 U.S.C. § 8124(a). 
5

ORDER 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the December 30, 2016 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is set aside, and the case is remanded for further action 

consistent with this decision. 

Issued: July 24, 2017 

Washington, DC 

 

 Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board 

 

 Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge 

 Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board