RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2021-00048
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Army 	SEPARATION DATE:  20050625

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E5, Unit Supply Specialist, medically separated “[bilateral] sensorineural hearing loss” with a disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION:  No specific contention was made.  The complete submission is at Exhibit A.

SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The panel’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44.  It is limited to review of disability ratings assigned to those conditions determined by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) to be unfitting for continued military service, and when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), but determined by the PEB to be not unfitting or non-compensable.  Any conditions outside the panel’s defined scope of review, and any contention not requested in this application, may remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.  The panel’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections when appropriate.  The panel gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of disability at the time of separation.  

RATING COMPARISON:

SERVICE PEB - 20050427	VARD - 20060629	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
[Bilateral] Sensorineural Hearing Loss	6100	10%	Bilateral Hearing Loss	6100	10%	20060601	
COMBINED RATING:  10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  40%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

[Bilateral] Sensorineural Hearing Loss.  According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s hearing loss condition began in approximately 2002.  During the 31 January 2005 MEB examination (recorded on DD Forms 2807-1 and 2808), 5 months prior to separation, physical examination revealed normal ears and normal eardrums.  

The 24 January 2005 MEB NARSUM examination noted complaints of “can’t hear well.”  She had difficulty understanding speech, but denied any ear pain, pressure, fullness, or ear popping.  She complained of ringing in both ears.  The audiogram demonstrated average decibel loss of 63 in the right ear and average of 50 in the left ear.  Speech discrimination values were not provided. Physical examination showed intact tympanic membranes, and both external auditory canals were normal.  

At the 1 June 2006 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, 11 months after separation, the CI reported constant ringing in both ears and difficulty understanding conversations.  The 1 June audiogram showed right ear with 57.5 decibel loss with speech discrimination score of 76, and 45 decibel loss in the left ear with speech discrimination of 82.  

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The PEB and VA rated the [bilateral] hearing loss condition 10%, coded 6100 (hearing loss).  The VA citing objective testing.  The in-service audiology examination, most proximate to separation, recorded right ear of 50 decibel pure tone loss and left ear of approximately 60 decibels. The VA reported approximately 60 decibels for the right ear; and 45 for the left, for 10%. Both audiology results corresponds to I table VII for 10%.  After due deliberation, considering all the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the panel concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the [bilateral] sensorineural hearing loss condition.

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the [bilateral] sensorineural hearing loss condition and IAW VASRD §4.87, the panel recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  There are no other conditions within the panel’s scope of review for consideration.  Therefore, the panel recommends no modification or re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.  

The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20210422, w/atchs
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Record

AR20210015826, XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXX:

	The Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) reviewed your application and found your separation disability rating and your separation from the Army for disability with severance pay to be accurate.  I have reviewed the Board’s recommendation and record of proceedings (copy enclosed), and I accept its recommendation.  I regret to inform you that your application to the DoD PDBR is denied.  

	This decision is final.  Recourse within the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army is exhausted; however, you have the option to seek relief by filing suit in a court of appropriate jurisdiction.

Sincerely,