Sinusitis decisions — 2003

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for chronic sinusitis and a neck and cervical spine disorder, finding that no new and material evidence was submitted to reopen the claim of chronic sinusitis. The cervical spine disability was not shown until after service separation, and there is no presumption or other basis for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's sinusitis warrants a 10 percent rating since January 3, 1996. The claim for service connection of residual paresthesia from tooth extraction is granted.

The Board has granted a 20 percent rating for the veteran's residuals of a pelvic fracture, finding that they are analogous to malunion of the femur with moderate left hip disability.

The Board dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of his appeal.

The veteran's sinusitis and allergic rhinitis have been evaluated at a 10 percent rating since October 1, 1992. The evidence does not support an evaluation in excess of this level.

The Board found that the veteran's sinusitis and allergic rhinitis, patellofemoral pain syndrome of the right knee, and patellofemoral pain syndrome of the left knee (status post arthroscopic surgery) do not warrant a rating in excess of 10 percent. The evidence did not meet the criteria for higher ratings under the applicable VA Rating Schedule.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for service connection for allergic rhinitis as there was no evidence of chronic allergic rhinitis during service and the current diagnosis is sinusitis, which has already been established.

The VA has denied the veteran's claim for a higher disability rating for her allergic rhinitis, status post septorhinoplasty, as it does not meet the criteria for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent.

The Board has determined that the veteran's claimed sinusitis and arthritis of shoulders, wrists, hips, cervical spine, and thoracic spine are not service-connected. The evidence does not support a finding that these conditions had their onset during service or are causally related to service.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for maxillary sinusitis and essential hypertension, claimed as atypical chest pain. The evidence did not reveal a current diagnosis of either condition or establish that they were incurred in or aggravated by active duty.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for allergic rhinitis with headaches, finding that her current condition was not incurred or aggravated during her military service.

The Board has granted a 30 percent evaluation for service-connected allergic rhinitis with sinusitis, finding that the veteran's frequent allergy attacks and associated headaches warrant this rating.

The VA has granted the veteran's appeal and assigned a 30 percent disability rating for his service-connected sinusitis from July 14, 1993 through September 14, 2000. As of September 15, 2000, the VA denied an increased rating beyond 10 percent.

The VA denied the veteran's claim for an evaluation in excess of 50 percent for PTSD, finding that his condition did not meet the criteria for a higher rating based on the symptoms described.

The Board has determined that the veteran's chronic sinusitis warrants a rating of 10 percent, effective May 1, 1991.

The Board denied a compensable evaluation for the veteran's rhinitis, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for any higher rating under either the old or new VA rating criteria.

The Board of Veterans' Appeals (BVA) has determined that the veteran's pre-existing allergic rhinitis increased in severity during service, warranting service connection.

The Board has dismissed the veteran's appeal due to her withdrawal of the appeal, leaving no issues for further consideration.

The Board denied the veteran's claims of service connection for a chronic skin disability and chronic sinusitis, finding no evidence of such disabilities during his military service or any link to his military service.

The Board denied the veteran's claim for special monthly pension based on need for aid and attendance or being housebound, finding that he did not meet the criteria for either condition.