Workplace Safety and Insurance Board
Appeals Resolution Officer Decision
DECISION NUMBER: 20090083
OBJECTION BY: Worker
WORKER: Participated
REPRESENTATIVES: Worker, Employer
EMPLOYER: Participated
ISSUE
The worker objects to the denial of entitlement for noise-induced hearing loss.
The decision letter was a system-generated letter dated November 28, 2007.
HOW THE ISSUE ARISES
The worker worked for a railway from 1965 to 1999, when he retired. The worker submitted an audiogram dated March 5, 2007 for review regarding noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL).
A review of the audiogram was made and a calculation of the right and left-ear findings. Due to this calculation, it was determined that the worker had 17.75 decibels (dB) hearing loss on the right side and 24 dB on the left side.
The worker had insufficient hearing loss bilaterally to allow this claim. Entitlement to healthcare benefits was denied.
The worker objects to the denial of entitlement in this claim.
AUTHORITY
Operational Policy Manual Documents:
- 11-01-03 – Merits and Justice
- 11-01-13 – Benefit of Doubt
- 16-01-04 – Noise-Induced Hearing Loss, on/after January 2, 1990
ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE
In arriving at a decision in this claim, I have reviewed and considered the worker’s objection, the further discussions with the worker representative and I have reviewed and considered the file evidence. The worker representative confirmed that there is no further information to add for this review.
The worker’s employment with the railway is indicated to be from 1965 to 1999. On reviewing the file, I note that no review was done regarding the worker’s exposure to noise in the workplace as the audiogram submitted, on behalf of the worker, showed insufficient hearing loss.
In reviewing the audiogram of March 5, 2007, as well as the specialist’s report, I note that the worker was 62-years of age at the time of the audiogram. The hearing loss indicated in the audiogram, showed 17.75 dB in the right ear and 24 dB in the left ear.
Hearing loss in workers occupationally exposed to hazardous noise is an occupational disease (under s.2 (1) and s. 15 of the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (the Act)), which is peculiar to, and characteristic of a process, trade or occupation involving exposure to hazardous noise in Ontario.
Noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) is a permanent loss of hearing in both ears resulting from sensorineural (inner ear) damage due to prolonged, continuous, hazardous noise exposure.
Workers with occupational NIHL that is sufficient to cause a hearing impairment may be entitled to benefits. Entitlement to health care and rehabilitation benefits begins with a hearing loss of 22.5 dB in each ear when the hearing loss in the four speech frequencies (500, 1000, 2000, and 3000 Hertz) are averaged. The following is persuasive evidence of work-relatedness in claims for sensorineural hearing loss
- continuous exposure to 90 dB(A) of noise for 8 hours per day, for a minimum of 5 years, or the equivalent, and
- a pattern of hearing loss consistent with noise-induced sensorineural hearing loss.
A presbycusis (aging) factor of 0.5 dB is deducted from the measured hearing loss (averaged over the 500, 1000, 2000, and 3000 Hz frequencies) for every year the worker is over the age of 60 at the time of the audiogram. The hearing loss that remains after the presbycusis adjustment is then used to determine entitlement to benefits. Entitlement to health care and rehabilitation benefits is available when the adjusted hearing loss is at least 22.5 dB in each ear.
The audiogram submitted for the worker dated March 5, 2007, shows the worker has insufficient hearing loss for entitlement consideration. The worker’s hearing loss on the right side is specifically 17.75 dB, which is insufficient for any claim entitlement consideration.
Also, as the worker has been retired since 1999, and the first audiogram submitted is dated March 2007, any further hearing loss after this date would be considered non-compensable.
The worker representative’s request for entitlement to be judged on its own merit is noted; however, as the NIHL operational policy is very specific as to the testing levels and the bilateral results needed for a claim to be accepted, there is no latitude with which to extend benefit of doubt in this claim. The worker clearly, based on the audiogram of March 5, 2007, has insufficient hearing loss to consider a claim with the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB).
CONCLUSION
The worker’s request for entitlement to healthcare for NIHL is denied.
The worker’s objection is denied.
DATED August 13, 2009
N. Grunenko
Appeals Resolution Officer
Appeals Branch