ALLERGIC RHINITIS

Summary

The veteran, who served from January 1992 to August 2014, including service in Southwest Asia, appeals the denial of an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis. The veteran sought an increased rating, asserting symptoms were more severe than currently rated. The Board reviewed the evidence, including a December 2023 VA examination, which diagnosed allergic rhinitis but found no polyps or greater than 50 percent nasal obstruction. The veteran reported postnasal drip, mild cough, and shortness of breath with exercise but denied current treatment. The VA examiner concluded the condition did not impact the veteran's ability to work. The Board found the medical evidence, particularly the VA examination, more persuasive than the veteran's self-assessment of severity, as it did not meet the criteria for a 10 percent rating (requiring more than 50 percent nasal obstruction or polyps). The Board also considered and denied an inferred claim for TDIU, as the VA examiner found the condition did not impact employability and the veteran did not assert inability to work. Consequently, the Board denied an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis.

Rationale

Allergic rhinitis rated under DC 6522.; Criteria for 10% rating require >50% nasal obstruction or polyps.; VA exam found no polyps or >50% obstruction.

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26038799
Decision Date: 04/27/26	Archive Date: 04/27/26

DOCKET NO. 250106-510265
DATE: April 27, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is denied. 

FINDING OF FACT

Throughout the period on appeal, the Veteran's allergic rhinitis has not resulted in polyps or greater than 50 percent obstruction of nasal passages on both sides or complete obstruction on one side.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.1-4.14, 4.96, 4.97, Diagnostic Code 6522.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1992 to August 2014, to include service in Southwest Asia. 

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision dated January 2024 issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The rating decision on appeal constitutes an initial decision; therefore, the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), applies.

In the January 2025 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Evidence Submission docket. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the January 2024 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran with, or within 90 days from receipt of, the VA Form 10182. 38 C.F.R. § 20.303. If evidence was submitted either (1) during the period after the AOJ issued the decision on appeal and prior to the date the Board received the VA Form 10182, or (2) more than 90 days following the date the Board received the VA Form 10182, the Board did not consider it in its decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.303, 20.801. 

If the Veteran would like VA to consider any evidence that was submitted that the Board could not consider, the Veteran may file a Supplemental Claim (VA Form 20-0995) and submit or identify this evidence. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2501. If the evidence is new and relevant, VA will issue another decision on the claim, considering the new evidence in addition to the evidence previously considered. Id. Specific instructions for filing a Supplemental Claim are included with this decision. 

The Board is cognizant of the recent decision issued by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) in the case of Williams v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 305 (2024). There, the Court held, in essence, that the Board must refrain from deciding a case until the case proceeds to the point where a docket switch is no longer permitted under the terms of 38 C.F.R. § 20.202(c)(2). In this case, a docket switch is no longer permitted under the terms of 38 C.F.R. § 20.202(c)(2) as it is more than one year from the date that the AOJ mailed notice of the decision on appeal, and it is more than 60 days of the date that the Board received the January 2025 VA Form 10182. Therefore, the Board shall proceed with adjudication.

The Board notes that on the January 2025 Notice of Disagreement, the Veteran listed entitlement to an increased rating for headaches, unspecified. However, in January 2025, the Veteran submitted a Decision Review Request: Higher-Level Review (VA Form 20-0996) listing the same issue and appealing the same rating decision. As the January 2025 VA Form 20-0996 was pending at the time the Veteran filed the January 2025 Notice of Disagreement, this constituted an improper concurrent election. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.2500(b) (prohibits a claimant from concurrently electing review of an AOJ decision under different appeal lanes). The Board in a February 2025 letter stated that it could not review an increased rating for headaches, unspecified as the Veteran had already submitted the VA Form 20-0996. Therefore, an increased rating for headaches, unspecified is not addressed in this appeal.

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is denied.

The Veteran
 rating decision. As the January 2025 VA Form 20-0996 was pending at the time the Veteran filed the January 2025 Notice of Disagreement, this constituted an improper concurrent election. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.2500(b) (prohibits a claimant from concurrently electing review of an AOJ decision under different appeal lanes). The Board in a February 2025 letter stated that it could not review an increased rating for headaches, unspecified as the Veteran had already submitted the VA Form 20-0996. Therefore, an increased rating for headaches, unspecified is not addressed in this appeal.

Entitlement to an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is denied.

The Veteran generally seeks an initial compensable rating for his service connected allergic rhinitis as his symptoms are more severe than contemplated by the currently assigned rating. See January 2025 Notice of Disagreement. Specific argument in support of this appeal was not received. 

Disability ratings are determined by evaluating the extent to which a veteran's service-connected disability adversely affects his or her ability to function under the ordinary conditions of daily life, including employment, by comparing his or her symptomatology with the criteria set forth in the Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule). See 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. § 4.1. If two ratings are potentially applicable, the higher rating will be assigned if the disability more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating; otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.7. Any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability will be resolved in favor of the veteran. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.3.

Separate evaluations may be assigned for separate periods of time if such distinct periods are shown by the competent evidence of record during the appeal, a practice known as "staged" ratings. Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007); Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999). VA's determination of the present level of a disability may result in a conclusion that the disability has undergone varying and distinct levels of severity throughout the entire time period the increased-rating claim has been pending. Hart v. Mansfield, supra.

When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence as to any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA will resolve reasonable doubt in favor of the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc).

The Veteran's allergic rhinitis is rated as noncompensable under Diagnostic Code 6522. Allergic rhinitis is rated under Diagnostic Code 6522. Under Diagnostic Code 6522, allergic rhinitis with no polyps, but with greater than 50 percent obstruction of the nasal passage on both sides or complete obstruction on one side warrants a 10 percent rating. 38 C.F.R. § 4.97. A 30 percent rating is assigned when polyps are present. Id. In every instance where the schedule does not provide a zero percent rating for a diagnostic code, a zero percent rating shall be assigned when the requirements for a compensable rating are not met. 38 C.F.R. § 4.31.

Turning to the evidence of record, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in December 2023. The VA examiner diagnosed allergic rhinitis. The Veteran reported postnasal drip, mild cough and mild shortness of breath when exercising. He denied current treatment. The examiner indicated that the Veteran's allergic rhinitis was noted not to have more than 50 percent obstruction of the nasal passage on both sides, complete obstruction on one side, permanent hypertrophy, and had no nasal polyps. The Veteran was not noted to have any granulomatous conditions or chronic laryngitis. The examiner stated that the Veteran's allergic rhinitis did not impact his ability to work. 

Further review of the record shows that the Veteran receives treatment at VA for various disabilities. However, there is no indication from the treatment notes of record that the Veteran has reported symptoms of such disorder that are worse than those noted in the VA examination report of record.

After a review of the evidence, the Board finds that an initial compensable rating for the Veteran's allergic rhinitis during the appeal period is not warranted. The record does not reveal, and the Veteran has not alleged, a greater than 50 percent obstruction of nasal passage on both sides or complete obstruction on one side or polyps. Notably, during the December 2023 Sinusitis/Rhinitis
's allergic rhinitis did not impact his ability to work. 

Further review of the record shows that the Veteran receives treatment at VA for various disabilities. However, there is no indication from the treatment notes of record that the Veteran has reported symptoms of such disorder that are worse than those noted in the VA examination report of record.

After a review of the evidence, the Board finds that an initial compensable rating for the Veteran's allergic rhinitis during the appeal period is not warranted. The record does not reveal, and the Veteran has not alleged, a greater than 50 percent obstruction of nasal passage on both sides or complete obstruction on one side or polyps. Notably, during the December 2023 Sinusitis/Rhinitis and Other Conditions of the Nose, Throat, Larynx and Pharynx VA examination, the examiner found that the Veteran's allergic rhinitis did not manifest in symptoms of greater than 50 percent obstruction of nasal passage on both sides or complete obstruction on one side or polyps. As noted above, the Veteran has reported allergic rhinitis symptoms, however, there is no assertion that he has allergic rhinitis with polyps. The clinical evidence of record does not reflect that the Veteran has allergic rhinitis with polyps. A compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is therefore not warranted.

The Board has considered whether a higher or separate rating is warranted under alternative diagnostic codes. However, the record does not reveal, and the Veteran does not allege, bacterial rhinitis, granulomatous rhinitis, an injury to the pharynx, stenosis of the larynx, aphonia or laryngitis. Therefore, a higher or separate rating under Diagnostic Codes 6515, 6516, 6519, 6520, 6521, 6523, or 6524 is not warranted.

The Board notes that Diagnostic Code 6522 does not contemplate the use of medication. The Board is cognizant of the recent Court decision in Ingram v. Collins, in which the Court reaffirmed prior holdings that in rating disabilities, the Board must discount the beneficial effects of medication when the relevant rating criteria do not contemplate medication use. Ingram v. Collins, 38 Vet. App. 130 (2025); see also Jones v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 56 (2012); McCarroll v. McDonald, 28 Vet. App. 267 (2016). Here, the Veteran did not report the use of medication. Therefore, further discussion of Ingram is unnecessary. 

In reaching its conclusions, the Board acknowledges the Veteran's belief that his allergic rhinitis symptoms are more severe than the current rating reflects. The Board must consider the entire evidence of record when analyzing the criteria laid out in the rating schedule. While the Board recognizes that the Veteran is competent to provide evidence regarding his symptomatology, he is not competent to provide an opinion regarding the severity of his symptomatology in accordance with the rating criteria. Woehlaert v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 456 (2007) (although the claimant is competent in certain situations to provide a diagnosis of a simple condition such as a broken leg or varicose veins, the claimant is not competent to provide evidence as to more complex medical questions). The Board finds the medical evidence in which professionals with medical expertise examined the Veteran's nose, acknowledged his reported symptoms, and described the manifestations of such disability in light of the rating criteria to be more persuasive than his own reports regarding the severity of his allergic rhinitis.

The Board has considered whether a staged rating under Fenderson v. West, supra, is warranted, however, the Board finds that his symptomatology has been stable throughout the period on appeal. Therefore, assigning a staged rating is not warranted. Further, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, with regard to the increased rating claim adjudicated herein. Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record).

Additionally, the Board has considered whether an inferred claim for a total disability based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) has been raised pursuant to Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). The Veteran's employment status is unclear from the record. However, the December 2023 VA examiner determined that the Veteran's allergic rhinitis did not impact his ability to work. Furthermore, the Veteran has not asserted, and the record does not reveal, that he is unable to maintain substantially gainful employment due to his allergic rhinitis. As such, the Board finds that a claim for
 required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record).

Additionally, the Board has considered whether an inferred claim for a total disability based upon individual unemployability (TDIU) has been raised pursuant to Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). The Veteran's employment status is unclear from the record. However, the December 2023 VA examiner determined that the Veteran's allergic rhinitis did not impact his ability to work. Furthermore, the Veteran has not asserted, and the record does not reveal, that he is unable to maintain substantially gainful employment due to his allergic rhinitis. As such, the Board finds that a claim for a TDIU is not raised in connection with the instant appeal. See Rice v. Shinseki, supra.

Accordingly, the Board finds that an initial compensable rating for allergic rhinitis is not warranted. The appeal is denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Lynch v. McDonough, supra.

 

 

KRISTY L. ZADORA

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Kuhn, 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.