Citation Nr: 22014569 Decision Date: 03/14/22 Archive Date: 03/14/22 DOCKET NO. 12-19 836 DATE: March 14, 2022 ORDER An increased disability rating (in excess of 10 percent) for follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease is denied. FINDING OF FACT The probative evidence of record, including an October 2021 VA examination and medical treatment records, do not support a finding that the Veteran's service-connected follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease produces symptoms that are not controlled by continuous treatment. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an increased (30 percent) disability rating for follicular cervicitis and pelvic inflammatory disease have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.321, 4.1-4.3, 4.6, 4.7, 4.116, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7699-7612. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from March 1983 to July 1987. These matters are before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2010 rating decision. In October 2016 the Veteran presented testimony at a Central Office hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ); a transcript is associated with the record. These matters were before the Board in March 2019 and May 2021 and were remanded for further development. An increased rating in excess of 10 percent for follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease is denied. Legal Criteria The Veteran's follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease is assessed under DC 7699-7612. DC 7699-7612, for diseases or injuries of the cervix, is rated pursuant to the General Rating Formula for Female Reproductive Organs (General Rating Formula). Under these criteria, a noncompensable rating is assigned for symptoms that do not require continuous treatment. A 10 percent rating is assigned for symptoms that require continuous treatment, and a 30 percent rating is assigned for symptoms not controlled by continuous treatment. 38 C.F.R. § 4.116, DC 7615. Factual Background At a March 2009 medical treatment, the Veteran reported that her menstruation was regular with a 26-day cycle. The Veteran reported that she had irregular bleeding since 1983 which can be controlled by treatment. The Veteran reported pelvic pain and white vaginal discharge with no foul odor. The conducting physician indicated that the Veteran's symptoms were responsive to therapy or treatment. See medical treatment records. A July 2009 medical treatment note indicates that the Veteran was given a Depo-Provera injection in March 2009 to stop her excessive vaginal bleeding. The attending physician explained that prior to the injection, the Veteran's menses were normal. See medical treatment records. A February 2011 medical treatment note indicates that the Veteran had no menses since her Depo-Provera shot in 2009. At a March 2013 medical treatment, the physician explained that the Veteran had a two-year history of amenorrhea and menopausal symptoms with an episode of postmenopausal bleeding in September 2012 but had no bleeding since then. At a November 2014 medical treatment, the Veteran reported mild-moderate menopausal symptoms. The Veteran did not report any other gyn problems or concerns. At a December 2017 medical treatment, the Veteran reported intermittent vaginal bleeding with menopausal symptoms. The Veteran reported that she had been using a hormone replacement therapy until August 2017. See medical treatment records. At a February 2018 medical treatment, the Veteran was negative for abdominal pain. At a July 2019 medical treatment, the attending physician noted that the Veteran had a history of postmenopausal bleeding but had no episodes in the past two years. At a March 2021 medical treatment, the Veteran specifically denied, urinary frequency, urgency, burning changes in vaginal discharge, and abdominal pain. In October 2021, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination during which the conducting physician explained that the Veteran's pelvic inflammatory disease caused abdominal pain. The physician indicated that the Veteran received dilation and curettage as a means of treatment. The physician noted that the Veteran's follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease caused severe pain on an intermittent basis and irregular menstruation. The physician also noted that the Veteran was treated with oral contraceptive pills for her oligomenorrhea. The physician explained that the Veteran does not require treatment for symptoms related to reproductive tract conditions. The physician also explained that the Veteran had not been diagnosed with endometriosis and did not show any signs of heavy or irregular bleeding. The physician indicated that the Veteran underwent a May 1987 colposcopy which revealed benign endocervical tissue, negative for dysplastic cells. Analysis The Board finds that the probative evidence of record is against a finding that the Veteran meets the criteria for an increased 30 percent rating for follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease. A review of the record indicates that the Veteran's abnormal vaginal bleeding has been controlled by the Depo-Provera shot in 2009. The July 2019 medical treatment note indicates that the Veteran did not have any episodes of irregular bleeding for two years. While the October 2021 VA examination indicates that the Veteran experiences severe pain, it only occurs on an intermittent basis and does not require treatment. Furthermore, at the February 2018 and March 2021 medical treatments, the Veteran denied experiencing abdominal pain. Additionally, the October 2021 examiner indicated that the Veteran has been able to treat her oligomenorrhea with oral contraceptive pills. Accordingly, the probative evidence of record does not support a finding that the symptoms caused by the Veteran's follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease are not controlled by continuous treatment. As such, the Veteran's appeal for an increased rating in excess of 10 percent for her follicular cervicitis with pelvic inflammatory disease must be denied. The Board notes that this decision does not leave the Veteran without recourse. If the service-connected condition worsens in the future, the Veteran is free to submit a new claim for an increased disability rating. To award an increased rating at this time, however, would be premature. VICTORIA MOSHIASHWILI Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Alexander Bahus 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.