Citation Nr: 18154306
Decision Date: 11/29/18	Archive Date: 11/29/18

DOCKET NO. 16-48 732
DATE:	November 29, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for sinusitis is denied.
FINDING OF FACT
The Veteran does not have currently diagnosed sinusitis.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for service connection for sinusitis have not been met.  38 U.S.C. § 1110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2017).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran had active service with the United States Navy from March 1978 to August 1982, and from June 1986 to January 2012.
This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of an October 2013 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Los Angeles, California.
Service connection will be granted if it is shown that the Veteran suffers from a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty, during active military service.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303.  Disorders diagnosed after discharge will still be service connected if all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service.  38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d); see also Combee v. Brown, 34 F.3d 1039, 1043 (Fed. Cir. 1994). 
In order to establish service connection on a direct basis, the record must contain competent evidence of: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service.  Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004).  In the absence of proof of a present disability there can be no valid claim. Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992). 
When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the benefit of the doubt will be granted to the claimant.  38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990).  To deny a claim on the merits, the preponderance of the evidence must be against the claim.  Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518, 519 (1996).
The Veteran’s service treatment records show that he complained and received medical care for sinusitis, including a corrective surgical intervention.  However, post-service records do not reveal a current diagnosis of sinusitis.  In August 2013, a VA examiner stated that the Veteran did not have sinusitis.  Rather, he reported that the Veteran had received a 2009 diagnosis of sinusitis and had undergone surgery in service, resolving his symptoms, top include recurrent infections.  There was no residual, chronic disability.  While the Veteran has complained of various intermittent symptoms, such as drainage, headaches, and some gagging, there is no competent evidence relating such to the in-service sinus problems, or his surgery. The Veteran, as a lay person, lacks the specialized training and knowledge to render such an opinion.  Kahana v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 428, 435 (2011).  Further, the examiner specified there are no such residuals.  
In the absence of proof of a present disability there can be no valid claim.  Brammer, supra.  The preponderance of evidence is against the Veteran’s service connection claim and there is no doubt to be resolved.  See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); Gilbert, supra.

 
WILLIAM H. DONNELLY
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	B. J. Komins, Associate Counsel