United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

M.H., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF 

ENGINEERS, ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL, 

Peoria, IL, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 18-1417

Issued: February 13, 2019

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

CHRISTOPHER J. GODFREY, Chief Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

ALEC J. KOROMILAS, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On July 17, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from a June 27, 2018 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 to 

consider the merits of the case.

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has met his burden of proof to establish greater than 24 

percent binaural hearing loss, for which he previously received a schedule award.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On October 21, 2017 appellant, then a 58-year-old retired lock and dam repairer leader, 

filed an occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he developed “ringing” and hearing 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

loss in both ears due to exposure to steel work, equipment, pneumatic tools and other noises while 

in the performance of duty. He noted that he first became aware of his condition and attributed it 

to his federal employment on April 10, 2015. Appellant retired on September 2, 2017. In support 

of his claim, he provided formsfrom the employing establishment’s hearing conservation program. 

OWCP undertook additional development of his claim.

On March 5, 2018 OWCP referred appellant to Dr. Xinyan Huang, a Board-certified 

otolaryngologist, for an otologic examination and audiological evaluation. In his March 21, 2018 

report, Dr. Huang performed an otologic evaluation of appellant and audiometric testing was 

obtained on his behalf on March 21, 2018. Testing at the frequency levels of 500, 1,000, 2,000, 

and 3,000 cycles per second revealed the following: right ear 25, 25, 40, and 65 decibels; left ear 

25, 30, 50, and 65 decibels. Dr. Huang advised that, in accordance with the sixth edition of the 

American Medical Association, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (A.M.A., 

Guides),2appellant had 20.625 percent impairment of the right ear due monaural loss, and 26.25 

percent impairment of the left ear due to monaural loss. Utilizing the combined hearing loss 

formula, he concluded that appellant had 21.563 percent binaural hearing loss. Dr. Huang then 

added an additional two percent for tinnitus impairment to reach binaural impairment of 23.56 

percent. He diagnosed bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus due to appellant’s exposure 

to noise in the workplace. Dr. Huang recommended hearing aid amplification.

By decision dated April 9, 2018, OWCP accepted appellant’s occupational disease claim 

for binaural sensorineural hearing loss and bilateral tinnitus.

On April 9, 2018 OWCP requested an OWCP district medical adviser complete a hearing 

impairment calculation worksheet.

In an April 30, 3018 report, Dr. Charles Pettit, a Board-certified otolaryngologist and a 

district medical adviser, provided an impairment calculation worksheet which, based on

Dr. Huang’s audiometric testing, indicated that appellant had 21 percent monaural loss in the right 

ear and 26 percent loss in the left ear. He then applied the combined hearing loss formula, finding 

22 percent binaural loss. Dr. Pettit added two percent for “troublesome tinnitus,” for a total of 24 

percent binaural loss. He advised that hearing aids were authorized.

By decision dated June 27, 2018, OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for 24 percent 

binaural hearing loss. It found that he was entitled to 24.96 weeks of schedule award 

compensation.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

The schedule award provisions of FECA3and its implementing regulations4set forth the 

number of weeks of compensation payable to employees sustaining permanent impairment from 

loss or loss of use, of scheduled members or functions of the body. FECA, however, does not 

 

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

3 5 U.S.C. § 8107.

4 20 C.F.R. § 10.404.
3

specify the manner in which the percentage loss of a member shall be determined. The method 

used in making such determination is a matter which rests in the sound discretion of OWCP. For 

consistent results and to ensure equal justice, the Board has authorized the use of a single set of 

tables so that there may be uniform standards applicable to all claimants. The A.M.A., Guides has 

been adopted by OWCP for evaluating schedule losses and the Board has concurred in such 

adoption.5

OWCP evaluates industrial hearing loss in accordance with the standards contained in the 

A.M.A., Guides. Using the frequencies of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 cycles per second, the 

losses at each frequency are added up and averaged.6 Then, the fence of 25 decibels is deducted 

because, as the A.M.A., Guides points out, losses below 25 decibels result in no impairment in the 

ability to hear everyday speech under everyday conditions.7 The remaining amount is multiplied 

by a factor of 1.5 to arrive at the percentage of monaural hearing loss.8 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, then added to the greater loss and the total is divided by six to arrive at the 

amount of the binaural hearing loss.9 The Board has concurred in OWCP’s adoption of this 

standard for evaluating hearing loss.10 The policy of OWCP is to round the calculated percentage 

of impairment to the nearest whole number.11 OWCP procedures provide that percentages should 

not be rounded until the final percent for award purposes is obtained. Fractions should be rounded 

down from .49 and up from .50.12

If tinnitus interferes with activities of daily living, including sleep, reading, and other tasks 

requiring concentration, enjoyment of quiet recreation and emotional well-being, up to five percent 

may be added to measurable binaural hearing impairment.13

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that the case is not in posture for decision.

 

5 See J.W., Docket No. 17-1339 (issued August 21, 2018); R.D., 59 ECAB 127 (2007); Bernard Babcock, Jr., 52 

ECAB 143 (2000).

6 A.M.A., Guides 250.

7

Id.; C.D., Docket No. 18-0251 (issued August 1, 2018).

8

Id.

9

Id.

10 See J.W., supra note 5; C.D., supra note 7.

11 P.L., Docket No. 17-0355 (issued June 27, 2018).

12 C.D., supra note 7; Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 3 -- Medical, Schedule Awards, Chapter 

3.700.4(b)(2)(b) (January 2010).

13 A.M.A., Guides 249.
4

In his March 21, 2018 report, Dr. Huang noted a history of appellant’s work-related noise 

exposure, and his review of the statement of accepted facts and the medical record. He described 

findings upon examination and attached an audiogram report dated March 21, 2018 which 

reflected testing at the frequency levels of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 cycles per second revealed 

the following: right ear 25, 25, 40, and 65 decibels; left ear 25, 30, 50, and 65 decibels. Dr. Huang 

diagnosed high-frequency binaural sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus causally related to 

factors of appellant’s federal employment. He advised, that in accordance with the sixth edition 

of the A.M.A., Guides,

14 appellant had 20.625 percent impairment of the right ear due monaural 

loss, and 26.25 percent impairment of the left ear due to monaural loss. Dr. Huang multiplied 

appellant’s hearing loss in his better ear, 20.625 percent on the right, by 5 to yield 103.125 percent.

He then added 26.25, appellant’s loss in his left ear, reaching a subtotal of 129.375 which, when 

divided by 6, yields 21.56 percent binaural loss. Utilizing the combined hearing loss formula,

Dr. Huang concluded that appellant had 21.56 percent binaural hearing loss, and included an 

additional 2 percent impairment rating for tinnitus to reach 23.56 percent binaural hearing loss. 

He did not round up his final calculation.

OWCP asked its district medical adviser, Dr. Pettit, to review the record and provide an 

impairment evaluation. In his April 30, 3018 report, Dr. Pettit reviewed Dr. Huang’s March 21, 

2018 report. On an impairment calculation worksheet, he recorded Dr. Huang’s frequency levels 

and indicated that appellant had 21 percent monaural loss in the right ear and 26 percent loss in 

the left ear. Dr. Pettit then applied the combined hearing loss formula, finding 22 percent binaural 

loss. He added 2 percent for “troublesome tinnitus,” for a combined 24 percent binaural loss. 

Dr. Pettit, however, did round the hearing loss for each ear early in his calculations when dividing 

the total loss of each ear by 4. For a total loss of 155 decibels in the right ear, he found an average 

threshold of 39, whereas the calculation before rounding yields an average threshold of 38.75, as 

found by Dr. Huang. In appellant’s left ear, Dr. Pettit utilized the proper formula by properly 

arriving at the average of 42.5.

As previously noted, OWCP procedures provide that percentages should not be rounded 

until the final percent for award purposes is obtained.15 Dr. Pettit’s calculation was therefore in 

error. Accordingly, this case must be remanded to OWCP for recalculation of appellant’s binaural 

hearing loss pursuant to OWCP procedures. After such further development as necessary, OWCP 

shall issue a de novo decision. 

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that this case is not in posture for decision.

 

14 Supra note 6.

15 Supra note 12.
5

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the June 27, 2018 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is set aside and this case is remanded for further proceedings consistent 

with this decision of the Board.

Issued: February 13, 2019

Washington, DC

Christopher J. Godfrey, Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Alec J. Koromilas, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board