Citation Nr: A21020577 Decision Date: 12/28/21 Archive Date: 12/28/21 DOCKET NO. 200709-96573 DATE: December 28, 2021 ORDER A rating in excess of 10 percent for loss of sense of smell is denied. A rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus is denied. A compensable rating for loss of sense of taste is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran's service-connected loss of sense of smell is assigned a 10 percent rating, the maximum rating authorized under Diagnostic Code (DC) 6275; factors warranting referral for extraschedular consideration are not shown and have not been specifically alleged. 2. The Veteran's service-connected tinnitus is assigned a 10 percent rating, the maximum rating authorized under Diagnostic Code (DC) 6260; factors warranting referral for extraschedular consideration are not shown and have not been specifically alleged. 3. The Veteran's loss of sense of taste is less than complete. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent for loss of sense of smell are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321, 4.1, 4.14, 4.87a, DC 6275. 2. The criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321, 4.1, 4.14, 4.87a, DC 6260. 3. The criteria for a compensable rating for loss of sense of taste are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321, 4.1, 4.14, 4.87a, DC 6276. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Navy from April 1966 to September 1990. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an October 2019 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which granted service connection for loss of sense of taste and assigned a noncompensable rating effective August 13, 2019; denied a rating in excess of 10 percent for loss of sense of smell and denied a rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus. The Veteran's VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal was received in July 2020. The Veteran elected the Direct Review docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. 1. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for loss of sense of smell. Loss of sense of smell is evaluated under DC 6275. A 10 percent rating, the maximum schedular rating, is assigned for complete loss of sense of smell. Here, the Veteran's loss of sense of smell has been assigned the maximum schedular rating available for loss of sense of smell under DC 6275, a 10 percent rating, throughout the appeal period. Therefore, there is no legal basis for a schedular higher rating for loss of sense of smell. The Board has no reason to question that the Veteran's loss of sense of smell has resulted in the functional limitations he has reported such as the complete inability to smell. However, it is specifically based on such impairment that the 10 percent schedular rating has assigned. Such limitations are contemplated by the criteria for the 10 percent rating that was assigned. The loss of sense of smell symptoms and impairment shown do not include any not adequately addressed by the schedular rating criteria. The disability picture presented by the loss of sense of smell is not exceptional (or alleged to be so), so as to suggest referral for consideration of an extraschedular rating under 38 C.F.R. § 3.321 may be warranted. Considering the foregoing, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim. Therefore, the claim must be denied. 2. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for tinnitus. Tinnitus is evaluated under Code 6260. A single 10 percent rating, the maximum schedular rating, is assigned for tinnitus, whether the sound is perceived as being in one ear, both ears, or in the head. Here, the Veteran's tinnitus has been assigned the maximum schedular rating available for tinnitus under that Code, a 10 percent rating, throughout the period on appeal. Therefore, there is no legal basis for a schedular higher rating for tinnitus. The Board has no reason to question that the Veteran's tinnitus has resulted in functional limitations including ringing in the ears. However, it is specifically based on such impairment that the 10 percent schedular rating has assigned. Such limitations are contemplated by the criteria for the 10 percent rating that was assigned. The tinnitus symptoms and impairment shown do not include any not adequately addressed by the schedular rating criteria. The disability picture presented by the tinnitus is not exceptional (or alleged to be so), so as to suggest referral for consideration of an extraschedular rating under 38 C.F.R. § 3.321 may be warranted. Considering the foregoing, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim. Therefore, the claim must be denied. 3. Entitlement to a compensable rating for loss of sense of taste. A noncompensable rating was granted for the Veteran's loss of taste (diagnosed as hypogeusia) as it was determined it is related to the service-connected disability of chronic rhino sinusitis, postoperative with associated headaches and epistaxis (also claimed as unexpected nose bleeding). The Veteran's loss of taste is rated under DC 6275. Under DC 6275, a complete loss of the sense of taste is required for a compensable rating. Here, the evidence of record does not show, and the Veteran has not contended that his loss of taste is complete. Rather, a September 2019 VA examination shows that the Veteran experienced only partial loss of sense of taste, and the Veteran has not described experiencing complete loss of his taste. Thus, as the Veteran's loss of taste has been less than complete, a compensable rating is not warranted. JOHN G. SETTER Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Modesto, Victor 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.