Citation Nr: 21076995
Decision Date: 12/28/21	Archive Date: 12/28/21

DOCKET NO. 15-27 530A
DATE: December 28, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for allergic rhinitis is remanded.

Entitlement to service connection for sinusitis is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from March 1981 to March 1983.

This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2014 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ).

In March 2019 and June 2021, the Board remanded these claims to obtain adequate VA examinations. 

1. Entitlement to service connection for allergic rhinitis is remanded.

2. Entitlement to service connection for sinusitis is remanded.

Despite the additional and regrettable delay, a remand is required because there was not substantial compliance with the Board's prior remand directives to provide the Veteran with an adequate medical opinion.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). The most recent August 2021 VA examination again fails to provide an adequate rationale. While the examiner does not discuss the pre-service symptoms, the examiner stated there is no evidence of chronic symptoms since service. The examiner did not discuss the Veteran's lay statements (evidence) regarding his symptoms since service and provided no rationale for why these statements were discounted. See, e.g., February 2017 VA Form 9. Accordingly, a remand is required for an addendum opinion. 

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. The AOJ should arrange for a VA medical opinion, with examination or telehealth interview of the Veteran ONLY if deemed necessary by a medical professional, to determine the nature and likely cause of his allergic rhinitis and sinusitis disabilities. The examiner should review the claim file (including this remand and the Veteran's February 2017 VA Form 9) and note such review was conducted. Based on review of the record, the examiner should provide an opinion with detailed rationale that responds to the following:

(a.) The examiner may presume current diagnoses for both disabilities on appeal.

(b.) For each allergic rhinitis and sinusitis disability diagnosed, is it at least as likely as not (50% or greater probability) that such disability was either incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran's military service? Please explain why.

(c.) The examiner MUST address the Veteran's lay statements (evidence) of symptoms he has experienced during and since service. The absence of documented treatment or diagnosis in service is not, by itself, an adequate reason to not find a nexus.

The examiner is reminded that the Veteran is competent to provide information about observable symptoms and events. The examiner should assume, for the purposes of the opinions, that the Veteran's reports are both accurate and credible.

A detailed explanation (rationale) is required for all opinions provided. (By law, the Board is not permitted to rely on any conclusion that is not supported by a thorough explanation. Providing an opinion or conclusion without a thorough explanation will delay processing of the claim and may also result in a clarification being requested.)

The Board notes for the Veteran he is permitted to submit any private medical or nexus opinions to supplement the record on remand. 

 

 

David Gratz

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	M. Williams, Associate Counsel

The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.