United States Department of Labor

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

__________________________________________

A.L., Appellant

and

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, MANEUVER 

AREA TRAINING EQUIPMENT SITE,

Jackson, MS, Employer

__________________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Docket No. 21-1233

Issued: January 31, 2022

Appearances: Case Submitted on the Record

Appellant, pro se

Office of Solicitor, for the Director

DECISION AND ORDER

Before:

JANICE B. ASKIN, Judge

PATRICIA H. FITZGERALD, Alternate Judge

VALERIE D. EVANS-HARRELL, Alternate Judge

JURISDICTION

On August 12, 2021 appellant filed a timely appeal from a May 14, 2021 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.2

ISSUE

The issue is whether appellant has greater than three percent binaural hearing loss for which 

he previously received a schedule award. 

1

5 U.S.C. § 8101 et seq.

2 The Board notes that following the May 14, 2021 decision, OWCP received additional evidence. However, the 

Board’s Rules of Procedure provides: “The Board’s review of a case is limited to the evidence in the case record that 

was before OWCP at the time of its final decision. Evidence not before OWCP will not be considered by the Board 

for the first time on appeal.” 20 C.F.R. § 501.2(c)(1). Thus, the Board is precluded from reviewing this additional 

evidence for the first time on appeal. Id.
2

FACTUAL HISTORY

On January 21, 2020 appellant, then a 55-year-old heavy mobile equipment worker, filed 

an occupational disease claim (Form CA-2) alleging that he sustained hearing loss causally related 

to factors of his federal employment. He submitted a referenceaudiogram dated October 26, 2012. 

In a development letter dated January 29, 2020, OWCP requested that appellant submit 

additional information in support of his claim, including his employment history and noise 

exposure data. It afforded him 30 days to submit the requested information.

In a response dated February 6, 2020, appellant described his history of noise exposure at 

work beginning in May 1988. His supervisor reviewed and concurred with his description of his 

employment and noise exposure.

On March 24, 2020 OWCP referred appellant, together with the case record and a 

statement of accepted facts (SOAF), to Dr. Robert G. Brousse, a Board-certified otolaryngologist, 

for a second opinion examination. 

In a report dated May 20, 2020, Dr. Brousse diagnosed high-frequency sensorineural 

hearing loss causally related to noise exposure at work. He recommended noise protection and a 

trial of hearing aids. Dr. Brousse reviewed an audiogram conducted by an audiologist on the same 

date, which demonstrated losses of 15, 15, 15, and 35 decibels (dBs) on the right and 20, 15, 20, 

and 70 dBs on the left at 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hertz (Hz), respectively. Utilizing the sixth 

edition of the American Medical Association, Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment

(A.M.A., Guides),3 he calculated that appellant had a monaural loss of zero percent in the right ear 

and 9.4 percent in the left ear, for a binaural loss of 1.6 percent. Dr. Brousse added an additional 

2 percent impairment for tinnitus, to find a binaural hearing impairment of 3.6 percent. He opined

that appellant had reached maximum medical improvement (MMI). 

On May 30, 2020 Dr. Jeffrey M. Israel, a Board-certified otolaryngologist serving as a 

district medical adviser (DMA), reviewed the May 20, 2020 report from Dr. Brousse. He applied 

OWCP’s standard for evaluating hearing loss under the sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guides to the 

findings from the May 20, 2020 audiogram and determined that appellant had no right monaural 

hearing loss, 9.38 percent left monaural hearing loss, and 3.6 percent binaural hearing loss. The 

DMA added appellant’s right ear hearing loss of 15, 15, 15, and 35 dBs at 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 

3,000 Hz, respectively, which totaled 80, and divided by 4, to find an average of 20. He subtracted 

the 25 dBs fence and multiplied by 1.5 to find 0 percent right ear monaural hearing loss. For the 

left ear, Dr. Israel added appellant’s hearing loss of 20, 15, 20, and 70 dBs at 500, 1,000, 2,000, 

and 3,000 Hz, respectively, which totaled 125, and divided by 4 to find an average of 31.25. He

subtracted the 25 dBs fence, multiplied the remaining 6.25 balance by 1.5, to calculate 9.375 left 

ear monaural hearing loss. Dr. Israel calculated the binaural hearing loss by multiplying the lesser 

right ear loss of 0 percent by 5, adding the 9.38 percent left ear loss, and dividing this sum by 6, 

which resulted in 1.6 binaural hearing loss. He added 2 percent for tinnitus and opined that 

appellant had 3.6 percent total binaural hearing loss. The DMA agreed with Dr. Brousse’s 

recommendation for hearing aids.

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

On June 8, 2020 OWCP accepted appellant’s claim for bilateral tinnitus and bilateral 

sensorineural hearing loss. 

On June 16, 2020 appellant filed a claim for compensation (Form CA-7) for a schedule 

award.

By decision dated July 21, 2020, OWCP granted appellant a schedule award for four 

percent binaural hearing loss with tinnitus.4 The period of the award ran for eight weeks from 

May 20 to July 14, 2020. OWCP noted that the award for bilateral hearing loss with tinnitus of 8 

weeks exceeded the award for nine percent monaural hearing loss in the left ear of 4.68 weeks.

Thereafter, appellant submitted a July 21, 2020 audiologic evaluation performed by an 

audiologist with the employing establishment. The results revealed hearing loss of 20, 25, 30, and 

70 decibels at 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz on the right and 15, 15, 20, and 35 decibels on the 

left at the same frequencies.

In a report dated October 13, 2020, an audiologist diagnosed bilateral sensorineural hearing 

loss and bilateral tinnitus. She performed an air-only audiogram that showed hearing loss of 5, 10, 

5, and 35 decibels at 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz on the right and 15, 15, 15, and 70 decibels 

on the left at the same frequencies. The audiologist reviewed the July 21, 2020 audiogram and 

found that the facility had switched ears in recording the results. 

On April 26, 2021 appellant requested reconsideration. 

On May 6, 2021 OWCP requested that appellant clarify whether he was requesting an

increased schedule award based on new work exposure or a review of the prior award. In a May 7, 

2021 response, appellant advised that he had been last exposed to hazardous noise at work on 

March 28, 2020 and was requesting a review of the July 21, 2020 award. 

On May 12, 2021 Dr. Israel reviewed the October 13, 2020 audiogram. Applying the 

standards set forth in the A.M.A., Guides for evaluating hearing loss to the audiometric data, he 

found 0 monaural hearing loss on the right, 5.625 monaural hearing loss on the left, and .9 percent 

binaural hearing loss. Dr. Israel added 2 percent for tinnitus and opined that appellant had 2.9 

percent total binaural hearing loss, which he rounded to 3 percent.

By decision dated May 14, 2021, OWCP modified its July 21, 2020 decision to reflect that 

appellant had three percent permanent impairment due to binaural sensorineural hearing loss. 

LEGAL PRECEDENT

The schedule award provision of FECA,5 and its implementing federal regulation,6 set 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 

4 The 3.6 percent binaural loss was rounded up by OWCP to the nearest whole number of 4 percent.

5

Supra note 1.

6

20 C.F.R. § 10.404.
4

not specify the manner in which the percentage loss of a member shall be determined. The method 

used in making such a determination is a matter which rests in the 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. OWCP evaluates the 

degree of permanent impairment according to the standards set forth in the specified edition of the 

A.M.A., Guides, published in 2009.7 The Board has approved the use by OWCP of the A.M.A., 

Guides for the purpose of determining the percentage loss of use of a member of the body for 

schedule award purposes.8

For hearing loss claims, the Board requires that the employee undergo both audiometric 

and otologic examination, that the audiometric testing precede the otologic examination, and that 

the audiometric testing be performed by an appropriately certified audiologist. The Board has 

explained that all audiological equipment authorized for testing meet the calibration protocol 

contained in the accreditation manual of the American Speech and Hearing Association. The 

audiometric test results must include both bone conduction and pure tone air conduction 

thresholds, speech reception thresholds and monaural discrimination scores, and the 

otolaryngologist’s report must include: date and hour of examination;date and hour of employee’s 

last exposure to loud noise; and a statement of the reliability of the tests.9

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

A.M.A., Guides.

10

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

frequency are averaged. Then, the fence of 25 dBs is deducted because, as the A.M.A., Guides

points out, losses below 25 dBs result in no impairment in the ability to hear everyday speech 

under everyday conditions.11 The remaining amount is multiplied by a factor of 1.5 to arrive at 

the percentage of monaural hearing loss.12 The binaural loss of hearing 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.13 The Board has concurred in OWCPs’ adoption of this standard for 

evaluating hearing loss.14

The A.M.A., Guides provides that if tinnitus interferes with activities of daily living, 

including sleep, reading (and other tasks requiring concentration), enjoyment of quiet rec reation, 

7 For decisions issued after May 1, 2009 the sixth edition of the A.M.A., Guidesis used. A.M.A., Guides, (6th ed. 

2009); 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, Exhibit 1 

(January2010).

8 P.R., Docket No. 19-0022 (issued April9, 2018); Isidoro Rivera, 12 ECAB 348 (1961).

9

See E.E.,Docket No. 19-1763 (issued March 24, 2020); J.G.,Docket No. 12-1469 (issued January 11, 2013).

10 A.M.A., Guides 250.

11 Id.; C.D., Docket No. 18-0251 (issued August1, 2018).

12 Id.

13 Id.

14 See D.R., Docket No. 20-1570 (issued April14, 2021); V.M., Docket No. 18-1800 (issued April23, 2019).
5

and emotional well-being, up to five percent may be added to a measurable binaural hearing 

impairment.15

ANALYSIS

The Board finds that appellant has a total of four percent binaural hearing loss.

In a report dated May 20, 2020, Dr.Brousse diagnosed employment-related high-frequency 

sensorineural hearing loss. Based on an audiogram obtained that date, he found no hearing loss in 

the right ear and a 9.4 percent loss of hearing in the left ear. Dr. Brousse opined that appellant had 

a 1.6 percent binaural hearing loss, with an additional 2 percent impairment for tinnitus. 

On May 30, 2020 Dr. Israel, a DMA, properly applied OWCP’s standardized procedures 

to the May 20, 2020 audiogram obtained by Dr. Brousse. He found that testing of the right ear at 

the frequencies of 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz revealed losses of 15, 15, 15, and 35, which he 

added to total 80. Dr. Israel divided by 4 to find an average loss of 20, from which he deducted 

the threshold fence of 25 dB to find a balance of 0. He multiplied 0 by 1.5 to find no monaural 

loss on the right side. For the left ear, Dr. Israel found that appellant had losses of 20, 15, 20, and 

70 at the frequencies 500, 1,000, 2,000, and 3,000 Hz, for a total of 125 and an average loss of 

31.25. Subtracting the fence of 25 dB yielded a balance of 6.25, which he multiplied by 1.5 to 

find 9.375 percent monaural loss. Dr. Israel calculated the binaural hearing loss by multiplying 

the lesser right ear loss of 0 percent by 5, adding the greater 9.38 percent left ear loss, and dividing 

this sum by 6, which resulted in 1.6 percent binaural hearing loss. He added 2 percent for tinnitus 

and opined that appellant had 3.6 percent total binaural hearing loss, which rounded to a 4 percent 

binaural hearing loss.16 As four percent binaural hearing loss yielded 8 weeks of compensation, 

and nine percent monaural loss yielded 4.68 weeks, OWCP properly granted appellant a schedule 

award on July 21, 2020 for four percent binaural hearing loss with tinnitus.17 

Subsequently appellant submitted an October 13, 2020 audiologist’s report and the results 

of an audiogram obtained on that date. Dr. Israel, on May 12, 2021, reviewed the audiogram and 

found that it demonstrated three percent binaural hearing loss. Based on the DMA’sreport, OWCP 

modified its July 21, 2020 decision to find that appellant had three percent binaural hearing loss 

rather than four percent binaural hearing loss. However, the October 13, 2020 audiogram does not 

comply with the requirements for audiograms set forth by OWCP. The test lacked bone conduction 

scores as required by OWCP’s procedures.18 Additionally, the audiogram was not prepared or 

15 A.M.A., Guides 249.

16 OWCP procedures provide that fractions should be rounded down from .49 or up from .50. See supra note 7 at 

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

17 FECA provides that a claimant is entitled to 52 weeks of compensation for 100 percent loss of hearing in one ear 

and 200 weeks of compensation for 100 percent hearing loss in both ears. 5 U.S.C. § 8107(c)(3). Multiplying four

percent by 100 yields 8 weeks of compensation, and multiplying nine percent by 52 yields 4.68 weeks of 

compensation.

18 Federal (FECA) Procedure Manual, Part 3, Medical, Requirements for Medical Reports, Chapter 3.600.8, Exhibit 

4 (September 1995). See also K.G., Docket No. 14-1827 (issued January 5, 2015).
6

certified as accurate by a physician as defined by FECA.19 If an audiogram is prepared by an 

audiologist, it must be certified by a physician as accurate before it can be used to determine the 

percentage of hearing loss.20 Consequently, OWCP erred in relying on this audiogram in 

modifying its schedule award determination. 

The Board finds that Dr. Brousse’s May 20, 2020 report and audiogram constitutes the 

weight of the evidence. Dr. Israel, the DMA, properly applied the standards for rating hearing loss 

under the A.M.A., Guides to the May 20, 2020 audiogram and found that appellant had four 

percent binaural hearing loss. Accordingly, the Board will modify the binaural hearing loss 

schedule award from three percent to four percent.21 

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 a total of four percent binaural hearing loss. 

19 A doctor of audiology is not a physician as defined by FECA. 5 U.S.C. § 8101(2); 20 C.F.R. § 10.5(t). See also 

L.C., Docket No. 14-1954 (issued January 5, 2015).

20 See D.L., Docket No. 17-1440, n.10 (issued September 10, 2018): JoshuaA. Holmes, 42 ECAB 231(1990).

21 See J.C., Docket No. 20-0322 (issued July 8, 2020).
7

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the May 14, 2021 decision of the Office of Workers’

Compensation Programs is affirmed as modified.

Issued: January 31, 2022

Washington, DC

Janice B. Askin, Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Patricia H. Fitzgerald, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board

Valerie D. Evans-Harrell, Alternate Judge

Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board