Sidney Hudson, the claimant, testified on his own behalf at the hearing. All other witnesses testified by deposition. The claimant indicated that he began working for A.P. Green Refractories in 1988. He continued to work there until the plant closed in April 2002. The claimant acknowledged that sometime in the late 1990s, his employer became RHI America and remained so until the plant closed.
The claimant testified that while at both A.P. Green and RHI America, he worked in the dry press department as a press mechanic. He described a variety of loud noises in the press department, including noises from steel balls pounding against bins, the sound of cars pulled on a chain, the release on the air pressure and the clanging of the presses. He described an environment that was very loud and noisy. The claimant also testified that normal conversation was often not possible in the press areas and that in those areas he had to talk loudly or shout to be heard. The claimant explained that although he began wearing hearing protection in the late 1990s, he did not wear it all of the time.
The claimant testified that he has a constant, locust-like ringing in his ears. He first noticed this several years ago. He hears it constantly, but notices it most as he falls asleep. The claimant denied any past history of ear diseases or ear surgeries. He has never been treated for hearing loss. The claimant indicated that the tinnitus was a constant whistle. He testified that the ringing in his ears affects his ability to hear the television or radio. It also affects his ability to talk on the telephone, and to hear conversations distinctly, particularly in noisy environments. At times, the ringing affects his ability to go to sleep.
The claimant indicated that he used to hunt rabbits and deer, using either a .22 rifle or a 12-gauge shotgun. He has not, however, hunted within the past three or four years. He acknowledged that he uses a chainsaw annually to cut approximately 7 truckloads of wood. He denied using hearing protection with either activity.
Before working for A.P. Green and later RHI America, the claimant worked for Harbison Walker Refractories for 11 years. At Harbison Walker, he was regularly exposed to loud noise. The claimant did not wear hearing protection there. In addition, the claimant worked in construction for four years.
When his employment with RHI America ended, the claimant was self-employed, and worked with sheet rock and constructed metal buildings. The claimant returned to Harbison Walker in November 2003, where he has worked ever since. He is again working in the press department. The claimant acknowledged that this environment is noisier than the one he worked in at A.P. Green, and later RHI America, because it is smaller with more presses and metal roofing.
In addition to his own testimony at the hearing, the claimant submitted the deposition testimony of Dr. David Mason. Dr. Mason testified that he is an audiologist and holds a Masters degree in audiology and a Ph.D. in Hearing Science. Dr. Mason testified that as an audiologist, he has treated people with tinnitus. Dr. Mason stated that he had an opportunity to examine the claimant and that he took a history of his thirty-year employment in brick refractories. According to Dr. Mason, the claimant described the work environment as a high noise area.
Dr. Mason indicated that, between September 21, 2004, and October 15, 2004, hearing evaluations were conducted on the claimant in accordance with the statute; Dr. Mason testified that no compensable hearing loss was found as a result of those tests. Dr. Mason did note that the claimant complained of tinnitus or ringing in the ears. Dr. Mason also explained that the claimant filled out a tinnitus questionnaire, and based on this, Dr. Mason concluded that the claimant had abnormal tinnitus that he valued at a 10 % impairment. Dr. Mason also testified that the claimant's tinnitus was related to the noise he was subjected to at work for 30 years. On cross-examination, Dr. Mason conceded that he is not a medical doctor. He also agreed that the evaluation of tinnitus is subjective, and that one must rely on the credibility of the claimant.
The employer and its insurer submitted the deposition of Dr. John McKinney. Dr. McKinney testified that he is a board-certified ENT (Ear, Nose, and Throat) physician. Dr. McKinney evaluated the claimant on October 1, 2004, at which time he also took the claimant's employment and social history. Dr. McKinney noted that the claimant gave a past history of hunting deer and rabbit, as well as use of a chainsaw to cut seven truckloads of wood per year. Dr.McKinney explained that the noise from the chainsaw use could be a contributing factor for the claimant's tinnitus. Dr. Mason's examination showed a fairly normal ear exam. The doctor noted that audiometric evaluations were performed. Based on this evaluation, Dr. Mason determined that the claimant had a 0 % hearing loss according to the Missouri Workers' Compensation statute.
Dr. McKinney also noted that the claimant complained of tinnitus. Dr. McKinney explained that tinnitus cannot be
tested objectively and is a subjective complaint of the patient. Dr. McKinney testified that based on the claimant's complaints, he has a 1 % disability of the body as a whole. Dr. McKinney further explained that "the presence of tinnitus in workers in industry does not prove that the origin of the condition of tinnitus is secondary to industrial noise." Dr. McKinney testified that while it is possible that the claimant's tinnitus occurred from industrial noise exposure, he could not say the tinnitus is related to his work within a reasonable degree medical probability.
On cross-examination, Dr. McKinney acknowledged that noise exposure above certain levels puts one at risk for hearing loss. He also explained that individuals with hearing loss are at greater risk for tinnitus. Dr. McKinney then admitted that such levels of noise would generally put one at greater risk for tinnitus, but he explained that in the claimant's case, there were other environmental factors aside from work that were possible contributors to his tinnitus. Dr. McKinney stated that it is impossible to quantify whether the claimant's work was more likely than not the cause of his tinnitus. Although Dr. McKinney did not determine that the claimant's tinnitus was caused by his work environment, he did testify that in his opinion, the claimant has a 1 % impairment due to his tinnitus.