United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

R.T., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, RHODE 

ISLAND AIR NATIONAL GUARD, 

Cranston, RI, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 19-0474

Issued: September 11, 2019

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Deputy Chief Judge

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On December 27, 2018 appellant filed a timely appeal from an August 15, 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 over the merits of this case.

ISSUE

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

warranting a schedule award.

FACTUAL HISTORY

On March 1, 2018 appellant, then a 59-year-old aircraft working supervisor, filed an 

occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he sustained hearing loss due to exposure to 

 

1 5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.
2

loud noise while working on a flight line with running engines in hazardous noise areas while in 

the performance of duty. He indicated that he first became aware of his condition and its relation 

to his federal employment on January 1, 2003.

In a statement received on March 1, 2018, appellant explained that he had been exposed to 

aircraft noise since the start of his employment. He noted that he worked 10-hour shifts and there 

were times when he would spend an entire shift on the flight line with aircraft engines running on 

both sides of his work area.

OWCP received an April 12, 2017 medical report from Dr. Michael Clarke, an audiologist.

Dr. Clarke indicated that appellant had been referred to him for a comprehensive audiologic 

evaluation. Appellant reported difficulty hearing the TV at times and an occasional “humming”

in his ears, right more than left. Dr. Clarke diagnosed bilateral mild-high frequency sensorineural 

hearing loss and tinnitus.

By decision dated June 20, 2018, OWCP accepted the claim for binaural sensorineural 

hearing loss.

On March 14, 2018 appellant filed a claim for a schedule award (Form CA-7).

On March 28, 2018 OWCP referred appellant to Dr. William O’Connor, a Board-certified 

otolaryngologist, for a second opinion evaluation. 

In a report dated May 9, 2018, Dr. O’Connor diagnosed bilateral, mild, very high frequency 

sensorineural hearing loss and tinnitus. He opined that appellant’s hearing loss was due, in part or 

all, to noise exposure encountered in his federal civilian employment. Dr. O’Connor obtained an 

audiogram at the frequency levels of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hertz (Hz) revealing decibel 

(dB) losses in the right ear of 20, 15, 30, and 25 dBs, respectively; and dB losses in the left ear of 

20, 20, 20, and 20 dBs, respectively.

In a July 24, 2018 report, Dr. Jeffrey M. Israel, a Board-certified otolaryngologist serving 

as a district medical adviser (DMA), noted that appellant served in the Federal Government from 

1980 to 1989 and from 1998 to 2018. He indicated that, during that time, appellant had been 

exposed to hazardous noise. Dr. Israel reviewed the May 9, 2018 audiogram obtained by

Dr. O’Connor and related that this was the only audiogram of record. He noted mild binaural 

hearing loss and calculated zero percent binaural hearing loss and thus concluded that the hearing 

loss was not ratable under the sixth edition of the American Medical Association, Guides to the 

Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (A.M.A., Guides).

2

 Dr. Israel found that appellant had 

reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) as of May 9, 2018, the date of his most recent 

audiogram. He suggested that appellant have yearly audiograms, utilize noise protection for his 

ears, and that no authorization for hearing aids should be made at that time.

By decision dated August 15, 2018, OWCP denied appellant’s claim for a schedule award. 

It explained that, under the A.M.A., Guides, appellant’s hearing loss was not sufficiently severe to 

be considered ratable for the purposes of a schedule award. It also informed him that he was not 

 

2 A.M.A., Guides (6th ed. 2009).
3

entitled to compensation for his tinnitus condition and that authorization for hearing aids was 

denied.

LEGAL PRECEDENT

The schedule award provision of FECA,3and its implementing federal regulations,4set 

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. However, 

FECA does not specify the manner in which the percentage of loss shall be determined. For 

consistent results and to ensure equal justice under the law for all claimants, OWCP has adopted 

the A.M.A., Guides as the uniform standard applicable to all claimants.5 As of May 1, 2009, the 

sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides is used to calculate schedule awards.6

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

A.M.A., Guides.

7

 Using the frequencies of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz, the losses at each 

frequency are added up and averaged. Then, the fence of 25 decibels is deducted because, as the 

A.M.A., Guides point out, losses below 25 decibels result in no impairment in the ability to hear 

everyday speech under everyday conditions. The remaining amount is multiplied by a factor of 

1.5 to arrive at the percentage of monaural hearing loss. 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 binaural 

hearing loss. The Board has concurred in OWCP’s adoption of this standard for evaluating hearing 

loss.8

Regarding tinnitus, the A.M.A., Guides provide that tinnitus is not a disease but rather a 

symptom that may be the result of disease or injury.9 The A.M.A., Guides state that, 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 a measurable binaural hearing impairment.10 A schedule award for tinnitus is not payable 

 

3 5 U.S.C. § 8107.

4 20 C.F.R. § 10.404.

5

Id. at § 10.404(a).

6 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 2 -- Claims, Schedule Awards and Permanent Disability Claims, Chapter 

2.808.5.a (March 2017); see also Part 3 -- Medical, Schedule Awards, Chapter 3.700.2 and Exhibit 1 (January 2010).

7 A.M.A., Guides 248-51 (6th ed. 2009).

8 See V.M., Docket No. 18-1800 (issued April 23, 2019).

9 A.M.A., Guides 249.

10 Id.; V.M., supra note 8.
4

unless the medical evidence establishes that the condition caused or contributed to a ratable hearing 

loss.11

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish ratable hearing 

loss, warranting a schedule award.

In a May 9, 2018 report, second opinion physician Dr. O’Connor noted mild binaural high 

frequency hearing loss due, in part or all, to noise exposure encountered in appellant’s federal 

civilian employment. An audiogram obtained by Dr. O’Connor at the frequency levels of 500, 

1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz revealed dB losses in the right ear of 20, 15, 30, and 25 dBs, 

respectively, and dB losses in the left ear of 20, 20, 20, and 20 dBs, respectively.

OWCP’s DMA, Dr. Israel, on July 24, 2018, reviewed Dr. O’Connor’s report and 

audiometric findings and properly applied OWCP’s standardized procedures in finding that 

appellant had a zero percent bilateral hearing loss impairment.

12

 He determined that appellant’s 

right ear hearing loss resulted in an average loss of 22.5 (90 ÷ 4) dBs, and the left ear loss averaged 

20 (80 ÷ 4) dBs. After subtracting the 25 dB fence, both the right ear and left ear losses were 

reduced to zero. When multiplied by 1.5, the resulting monaural loss in each ear was zero percent. 

Dr. Israel therefore found a total of zero percent binaural hearing loss. 

The Board finds that there is no current medical evidence of record to establish ratable 

hearing loss under OWCP’s standardized procedures for rating hearing impairment. Although 

appellant has an employment-related hearing loss, it is not sufficiently severe to be ratable for 

schedule award purposes.13 As the August 23, 2018 audiogram did not demonstrate that 

appellant’s hearing loss was ratable, he is not entitled to a schedule award. 

The Board also notes that Dr. O’Connor diagnosed tinnitus. The A.M.A., Guides allows 

for compensation of up to 5 percent for tinnitus in the presence of measurable hearing loss, if the 

tinnitus impacts the ability to perform activities of daily living.14 The Board has repeatedly held, 

however, that there is no basis for paying a schedule award for a condition such as tinnitus unless 

the evidence establishes that the condition caused or contributed to a ratable hearing loss. As the 

medical evidence establishes that appellant’s hearing loss is not ratable, the Board finds that the 

DMA properly determined that an additional impairment rating may not be added for tinnitus.15 

 

11 See R.P., Docket No. 15-703 (issued June 1, 2015); Charles H. Potter, 39 ECAB 645 (1988).

12 Supra note 8.

13 See B.E., Docket No. 18-1785 (issued April 1, 2019); R.S., Docket No. 18-1524 (issued February 5, 2019).

14 A.M.A., Guides 246; see V.M., supra note 8.

15 R.P., supra note 11; Richard Larry Enders, 48 ECAB 184 (1996).
5

Appellant may request a schedule award or increased schedule award at any time based on 

evidence of a new exposure or medical evidence showing progression of an employment-related 

condition resulting in permanent impairment or increased impairment.

CONCLUSION

The Board finds that appellant has not met his burden of proof to establish ratable hearing 

loss, warranting a schedule award.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the August 15, 2018 decision of the Office of 

Workers’ Compensation Programs is affirmed.

Issued: September 11, 2019

Washington, DC

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Deputy Chief Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board