Citation Nr: 18140694 Decision Date: 10/05/18 Archive Date: 10/05/18 DOCKET NO. 14-37 389 DATE: ORDER Entitlement to a higher initial rating for degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine with intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) (hereinafter “low back disability”), currently rated as 20 percent disabling is denied in part, and granted in part. Entitlement to a higher initial rating for left lower extremity (LLE) radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve, currently rated as 10 percent disabling is denied in part, and granted in part. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Prior to June 8, 2017, the Veteran’s low back disability was manifested by flexion limited to, at worst, 60 degrees and without favorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine. 2. Since June 8, 2017, the Veteran’s low back disability manifests with flexion to 30 degrees when considering functional loss due to pain, weakness, fatigability, incoordination, or pain on movement after repetitive motion or during flare-ups. 3. Prior to June 8, 2017, the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy (sciatic) was characterized by mild intermittent pain, paresthesias and/or dysthesias, and numbness, but not moderate or severe pain and without objective evidence of decreased strength, muscle atrophy, or constant pain. 4. Since June 8, 2017, the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy is characterized by mild constant pain, moderate paresthesias and/or dysthesias, moderate numbness, and decreased muscle strength, reflexes and sensation, but not severe pain (intermittent or constant) and without objective evidence of muscle atrophy or more severe loss of muscle strength, reflexes and sensation. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Prior to June 8, 2017, the criteria for an initial rating in excess of 20 percent for a low back disability were not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1-4.14, 4.20, 4.27, 4.40, 4.45, 4.59, 4.71a, Diagnostic Code (DC) 5242. 2. Since June 8, 2017, the criteria for an initial rating of 40 percent for a low back disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1-4.14, 4.20, 4.27, 4.40, 4.45, 4.59, 4.71a, DC 5242. 3. Prior to June 8, 2017, the criteria for an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for LLE radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve were not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1-4.10, 4.124a, DC 8520. 4. Since June 8, 2017, the criteria for an initial rating of 20 percent for LLE radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1-4.10, 4.124a, DC 8520. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served honorably in the United States Army from August 1987 to December 1987 and from March 2003 to April 2004. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs. There is another pending claim on appeal for entitlement to an annual clothing allowance due to service connected knee and back disabilities. Because the clothing allowance claim arises from a different agency of original jurisdiction, the clothing allowance claim is the subject of a separate Board decision. See BVA Directive 8430, Board of Veterans’ Appeals, Decision Preparation and Processing, 14(c)(1) (noting that where there are matters arising out of two or more agencies of original jurisdiction, separate decisions are required). That issue will be addressed in a subsequent Board decision. Increased Rating Disability ratings are determined by applying the criteria set forth in the VA’s Schedule for Rating Disabilities (Rating Schedule), 38 C.F.R. § Part 4. 38 U.S.C. § 1155. The percentage ratings contained in the Rating Schedule represent, as far as can be practicably determined, the average impairment in earning capacity resulting from diseases and injuries incurred or aggravated during military service and the residual conditions in civilian occupations. 38 U.S.C. § 1155; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(a), 4.1. Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. Each disability is viewed in relation to its history. 38 C.F.R. § 4.1; Peyton v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 282 (1991). Where entitlement to compensation has already been established and an increase in the disability rating is at issue, the present level of disability is of primary importance. Francisco v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 55, 58 (1994). Staged ratings may be assigned when the factual findings show distinct time periods during the appeal period where the service connected disability exhibits symptoms that would warrant different ratings. Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007). A claim is denied only if the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 56 (1990). Any reasonable doubt regarding the degree of disability is resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 C.F.R. § 4.3. Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher rating will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that evaluation. Id. § 4.7. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. Id. 1. Entitlement to a higher initial rating for a low back disability, currently rated as 20 percent disabling is denied in part and granted in part. Disabilities of the spine are rated under the General Rating Formula for Rating Diseases and Injuries of the Spine (General Formula). 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, DCs 5235-5242. The Veteran’s low back disability is currently rated at 20 percent under DC 5242. Under the General Rating Formula for Rating Diseases and Injuries of the Spine, with or without symptoms such as pain, stiffness or aching in the area of the spine affected by residuals of injury or disease, the following ratings will apply: a 10 percent rating is warranted if forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine was greater than 60 degrees but not greater than 85 degrees; or, combined range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine greater than 120 degrees but not greater than 235 degrees; or, muscle spasm, guarding, or localized tenderness not resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour; or, vertebral body fracture with loss of 50 percent or more of the height. A 20 percent rating is warranted when forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees, or the combined range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine is not greater than 120 degrees; or when there are muscle spasms or guarding severe enough to result in an abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour such as scoliosis, reversed lordosis, or abnormal kyphosis. A 40 percent rating is warranted when there is evidence of favorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine or forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is 30 degrees or less. A 50 percent rating is warranted for unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine and a 100 percent rating is warranted for ankylosis of the entire spine. Id. Any associated objective neurologic abnormalities, such as radiculopathy, are evaluated separately under an appropriate DC. 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, General Formula, Note 1. Disability of the musculoskeletal system is primarily the inability, due to damage or infection in parts of the system, to perform the normal working movements of the body with normal excursion, strength, speed, coordination and endurance. Functional loss may be due to the absence or deformity of structures or other pathology, or it may be due to pain, supported by adequate pathology and evidenced by the visible behavior in undertaking the motion. Weakness is as important as limitation of motion, and a part that becomes painful on use must be regarded as seriously disabled. 38 C.F.R. § 4.40. In Mitchell v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 32 (2011), the Court held that, although pain may cause a functional loss, “pain itself does not rise to the level of functional loss as contemplated by VA regulations applicable to the musculoskeletal system.” Rather, pain may result in functional loss, but only if it limits the ability “to perform the normal working movements of the body with normal excursion, strength, speed, coordination, or endurance.” Id. (quoting 38 C.F.R. § 4.40). With respect to joints the factors of disability reside in reductions of normal excursion of movements in different planes. Inquiry will be directed to more or less than normal movement, weakened movement, excess fatigability, incoordination, pain on movement, swelling, deformity or atrophy of disuse. 38 C.F.R. § 4.45. The intent of the Rating Schedule is to recognize actually painful, unstable or malaligned joints, due to healed injury, as entitled to at least the minimum compensable rating for the joint. 38 C.F.R. § 4.59. When 38 C.F.R. § 4.59 is raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the record, even in non-arthritis contexts, the Board should address its applicability. Burton v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 1, 5 (2011). For VA compensation purposes, normal forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is zero to 90 degrees; extension is zero to 30 degrees; left and right lateral flexion and rotation are zero to 30 degrees each. The combined range of motion refers to the sum of the range of forward flexion, extension, left and right lateral flexion, and left and right rotation. The normal combined range of motion of the thoracolumbar spine is 240 degrees. The normal ranges of motion for each component of spinal motion provided herein are the maximum that can be used for calculation of the combined range of motion. 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, General Formula, Note 2. In this case, the evidence shows two distinct time periods where the Veteran’s low back disability exhibited symptoms that warrant different ratings: (1) the period before June 18, 2017, and (2) the period since June 18, 2017. See Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999); Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007). The Board will discuss the separate periods in turn. A. Prior to June 8, 2017, a rating in excess of 20 percent is not warranted. During the March 2012 VA examination (VA examination), the Veteran reported symptoms of painful motion and limited range of motion. He reported flare-ups of pain when walking more than 15 minutes and with prolonged sitting or standing. Upon physical examination, thoracolumbar spine range of motion measurements were as follows: flexion to 60 degrees with pain at 45 degrees; extension to 5 degrees with pain at 5 degrees; right and left lateral flexion to 20 degrees each with pain at 20 degrees; and right and left lateral rotation to 20 degrees each with pain at 20 and 15 degrees, respectively. There was no additional limitation of motion following repetition. There was no localized tenderness, guarding or muscle spasms resulting in abnormal gait or spinal contour. Muscle strength and reflexes were normal and there was no atrophy. Sensory testing was normal except for decreased sensory reactions in left lower leg/ankle and foot/toes. The Veteran did not report using any assistive devices. Diagnostic imaging revealed arthritis. The examiner noted that the Veteran’s back disability impacted his ability to perform his duties as a firefighter secondary to left knee pain and low back pain. During the July 2014 VA examination, the Veteran reported that his condition improved slightly since his lumbar laminotomy (in 2010 or 2011). He denied flare-ups. Upon physical examination, thoracolumbar spine range of motion measurements were as follows: flexion to 70 degrees with pain at 60 degrees; extension to 20 degrees with pain at 15 degrees; right and left lateral flexion to 20 degrees each with pain at 15 degrees; and right and left lateral rotation to 20 degrees each with pain at 15 degrees. There was no additional limitation of motion following repetition. There was tenderness to palpation but no localized tenderness, guarding or muscle spasms resulting in abnormal gait or spinal contour. Muscle strength testing was normal and there was no atrophy. Deep tendon reflexes and sensation were normal. The Veteran did not report using any assistive devices. Diagnostic imaging revealed arthritis. Other medical records show complaints of pain and/or decreased range of motion due to back pain—most without any specific range of motion results. See, e.g., Memphis VAMC Records (Mar. 28, 2016) (showing forward flexion to 50 and combined range of motion to 170 degrees); id. (Oct. 10, 2013) (showing forward flexion to 80 and 90 degrees upon physical examination); id. (Aug. 12, 2010) (reporting back pain but feeling capable of doing regular work duties as fireman); Tabor Orthopedics Records (July 16, 2010) (noting tenderness over lumbar spine with normal gait and no evidence of spasms). Based on these findings, a rating in excess of 20 percent is not warranted prior to June 8, 2017. A 20 percent rating is warranted for forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees, or combined range of motion not greater than 120 degrees, or muscle spasms or guarding severe enough to result in an abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour such as scoliosis, reversed lordosis, or abnormal kyphosis. Here, the objective, contemporaneous evidence of record for this period shows the Veteran’s flexion was limited to, at worst, 60 degrees, and the combined range of motion was limited to, at worst, 145 degrees. Consideration of functional loss or impairment does not lead to a higher rating. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.40, 4.45, 4.59; see Mitchell v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 32, 38 (2011); Deluca v. Brown, 8 Vet. App. 202, 204-06 (1995). The Veteran only reported increased pain with increased standing, sitting, or walking during the March 2012 VA examination, and he denied flare-ups altogether during the July 2014 VA examination. Moreover, his symptoms were accounted for during the VA examinations and he could perform repetitive testing which did not reveal any additional limitation of motion due to pain, incoordination, weakness or fatigability. Moreover, while the Veteran reported symptoms of back pain and stiffness, the frequency and severity of those limitations did not rise to the level needed for a 40 percent rating. Indeed, no medical records show that the Veteran met the limitation of flexion or ankylosis criteria that is required for a 40 percent rating until the June 2017 VA examination. The Board recognizes that the Veteran believes his low back disability warrants a higher rating, and the Board understands that his low back condition has negatively impacted his quality of life; however, his current disability rating already accounts for symptoms such as pain, stiffness, and aching. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.40, 4.45, 4.59; Lyles v. Shulkin, 29 Vet. App. 107 (2017). Also, while the Veteran is competent to report symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to him through his senses, he has not been shown to have the requisite training or expertise to identify the specific medical findings of his low back disability according to the appropriate diagnostic code. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 67, 74 (1997); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994); see also Cartright v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 24, 25 (1991) (“although interest may affect the credibility of testimony, it does not affect competency to testify”). In contrast, competent evidence concerning the nature and severity of the Veteran’s condition was provided by the VA medical professionals who examined him during the current appeal and who rendered pertinent medical reports and opinions in conjunction with the evaluations. Therefore, the Board finds the VA medical findings are entitled to more weight than the Veteran’s lay assertions. For these reasons, the preponderance of the evidence is against a higher initial rating prior to June 8, 2017. B. Since June 8, 2017, a 40 percent rating is warranted. An initial 40 percent rating is warranted since June 8, 2017. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination on June 8. During the VA examination, the Veteran reported that his condition had worsened. He reported flare-ups that could last weeks and resulting in significant increases in pain and radiculopathy symptoms as well as functional loss of the spine in the form of difficulty bending over, lifting things, standing, walking, sitting and difficulty with stairs and ladders. Upon physical examination, thoracolumbar spine range of motion measurements were as follows: flexion to 40 degrees; extension to 20 degrees; right and left lateral flexion to 20 degrees; and right and left lateral rotation to 10 degrees. There was evidence of pain during the examination, pain with weight bearing, and evidence of localized tenderness, guarding, and muscle spasms resulting in abnormal gait or abnormal spinal contour. After repetitive testing, there was additional limitation of motion: flexion to 35 degrees; extension to 15 degrees; right and left lateral flexion to 15 degrees; and right and left lateral rotation to 5 degrees. The examiner stated that pain, weakness, fatigability, and lack of endurance would significantly limit the Veteran’s functional ability with repeated use over time and during flare-ups. The examiner estimated that an additional loss of 5 degrees; thus, resulting in forward flexion to 30 degrees. Muscle strength, reflexes, and sensory reactions were slightly decreased during testing. The examiner also diagnosed intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) but said the Veteran did not have any episodes requiring bed rest and treatment prescribed by a physician in the past 12 months. The Veteran reported regular using a back brace for his condition. Based on these findings, a 40 percent rating is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. 4.71a, DC 5242 (showing that a 40 percent rating is warranted when there is evidence of favorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine or forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine is 30 degrees or less). Based upon the evidence in this case, the earliest that that it can be factually ascertained that he met the criteria for the 40 percent rating is June 2017, the date of the VA examination. Therefore, the 40 percent rating cannot be assigned earlier than that date. See Swain v. McDonald, 27 Vet. App. 219, 224 (2015); accord Young v. McDonald, 766 F.3d 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2014); see also Tatum v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 139, 145 (2010) (discussing assignment of an effective date for a reduction in disability rating under DC 7528); VAOPGCPREC 12-98. At no time since June 8, 2017, has the evidence warranted a higher rating. To warrant a 50 percent rating, there must be evidence of unfavorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine, and to warrant a 100 percent rating requires evidence of unfavorable ankylosis of the entire spine. See 38 C.F.R. 4.71a, DC 5242. At no point does the record reveal any evidence of unfavorable ankylosis of either the thoracolumbar spine or the entire spine. See, e.g., March 2012 VA examination (showing the Veteran does not have any form of ankylosis of the spine); July 2014 Back VA examination (same); June 2017 VA examination (same); Gonzales v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2000) (finding that while the Board has an obligation to provide an adequate statement of reasons and bases supporting its decision, it need not discuss each piece of evidence). Furthermore, while the June 2017 VA examination first noted a diagnosis of IVDS, the Veteran did not have any incapacitating episodes in the prior 12 months; therefore, the IVDS criteria are not for application regarding the period prior to the June 2017 VA examination. See 38 C.F.R. 4.71a, DC 5243 (noting that IVDS is evaluated either under the General Formula or the Formula for Rating Intervertebral Disc Syndrome Based on Incapacitating Episodes, whichever method results in a higher rating). The Board recognizes that the Veteran is competent to report the severity and symptoms of his back disability; however, he is not competent to render a diagnosis of ankylosis which requires special education training and expertise. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1376-77 (Fed. Cir. 2007). On the other hand, such competent evidence concerning the nature and extent of the Veteran’s back disability was provided by medical personnel who examined him during the current appeal and who rendered pertinent opinions in conjunction with the evaluations. The medical findings (as provided in the examination reports) directly address the criteria under which these disabilities are evaluated. Accordingly, the Board accords more weight to the probative medical evidence of record. For these reasons, an initial rating of 40 percent, but no higher, is assigned for the Veteran’s degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine with IVDS, effective June 8, 2017. 2. Entitlement to a higher initial rating for LLE radiculopathy, currently rated as 10 percent disabling is denied in part, and granted in part. Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a, diseases of the peripheral nerves are rated based on the degree of paralysis, neuritis, or neuralgia. The term “incomplete paralysis” indicates a degree of impaired function substantially less than the type of picture for “complete paralysis” given for each nerve, whether due to varied level of the nerve lesion or to partial regeneration. 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a, Diseases of the Peripheral Nerves, Note. When the involvement is wholly sensory, the rating for incomplete paralysis should be for the mild, or, at most, the moderate degree. Id. The terms “slight,” “moderate” and “severe” are not defined in the rating schedule. Rather than applying a mechanical formula, the Board must evaluate all of the evidence to arrive at a just and equitable decision. 38 C.F.R. § 4.6. The use of such terminology by VA examiners and others, although an element to be considered by the Board, is not dispositive of an issue. All evidence must be evaluated in arriving at a decision regarding an increased rating. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.2, 4.6. The Veteran seeks a higher rating for his service connected LLE radiculopathy. It is currently rated under DC 8520 for incomplete paralysis of the sciatic nerve. Under DC 8520, mild incomplete paralysis is rated as 10 percent disabling, moderate incomplete paralysis is rated as 20 percent disabling, moderately severe incomplete paralysis is rated as 40 percent disabling, and severe incomplete paralysis with marked muscular atrophy is rated as 60 percent disabling. 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a. Throughout the period on appeal, the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy has been rated as 10 percent disabling. Previously, the medical evidence only demonstrated sciatic nerve involvement; now, the evidence also shows femoral nerve involvement. The issue of LLE radiculopathy of the femoral nerve is addressed later in the Board’s decision. Staged ratings are warranted because the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve was materially different during the appeal. The Board has created two stages: (1) before June 8, 2017, and (2) since June 8, 2017. A. An initial rating greater than 10 percent is not warranted prior to June 8, 2017. A rating in excess of 10 percent is not warranted prior to June 8, 2017. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in March 2012. This examination revealed normal muscle strength, normal reflexes and normal sensation except for decreased sensation in the left lower leg/ankle and foot/toes, and no muscle atrophy. The examination was only positive for mild intermittent pain, and mild paresthesias or dysesthesias, and mild numbness. The examiner assessed the Veteran’s condition as mild. The Veteran underwent another VA examination in July 2014. The Veteran reported that his condition had improved since his lumbar laminotomy in 2010 or 2011. This examination revealed normal muscle strength, normal reflexes, and normal sensation in the LLE. The examiner described the severity of the LLE as “not affected.” While there are other references to left lower extremity radiculopathy in the record, they do not demonstrate that the Veteran’s condition was worse than mild. See, e.g., Memphis VAMC Records (Apr. 21, 2016) (reporting numbness and tingling in LLE of moderate intensity without any corresponding loss of muscle strength, reflexes or sensation); id. (Nov. 15, 2013) (reporting improvement in LLE radiculopathy due to prescribed medication); id. (Mar. 14, 2013) (same); Tabor Orthopedics Records (July 16, 2010) (noting only mild numbness and pain in left lower extremity, with normal strength, stability, reflexes and sensation). The above evidence, when applied to DC 8520 demonstrates that an initial rating greater than 10 percent is not warranted prior to June 8, 2017. The symptoms described reflect, at worst, mild incomplete paralysis. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a, DC 8520. A higher rating of 20 percent requires evidence of moderate incomplete paralysis, which the evidence fails to show. The Board notes that the term “incomplete paralysis” indicates a degree of lost or impaired function substantially less than the type of picture for complete paralysis given with each nerve, whether due to varied level of the nerve lesion or to partial regeneration. 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a. When the involvement is wholly sensory, the rating should be for the mild, or at most, the moderate degree. Id. Here, the evidence indicates the Veteran’s disability during this period was wholly sensory and there are no treatment records during this period demonstrating worsening in symptoms to warrant a higher rating, such as increased muscle weakness or muscle atrophy. While the Veteran had, at times, subjective complaints of increased, even moderate, pain, the objective medical evidence demonstrates that there was not moderate incomplete paralysis of his sciatic nerve and/or symptoms related thereto. In considering the appropriate disability ratings, the Board has also considered the Veteran’s contention that his LLE radiculopathy is worse than the rating he receives. While the Veteran is competent to report symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to him through his senses, he is not competent to identify the specific medical findings of his radiculopathy in accordance with the appropriate diagnostic codes. Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 67, 74 (1997); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994); see also Cartright v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 24, 25 (1991) (“although interest may affect the credibility of testimony, it does not affect competency to testify”). On the other hand, such competent evidence concerning the nature and extent of the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy was provided by the VA medical personnel who examined him during the current appeal and who rendered pertinent opinions in conjunction with the evaluations. The medical findings (as provided in the examination reports) directly address the criteria under which these disabilities are evaluated and are entitled to more weight than the Veteran’s lay assertions. For these reasons, the preponderance of the evidence is against an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for LLE radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve prior to June 8, 2017. B. An initial rating of 20 percent is warranted for LLE radiculopathy since June 8, 2017. A higher initial rating is warranted since June 8, 2017. The Veteran was afforded another VA examination in June 2017. This examination revealed decreased muscle strength, decreased reflexes and decreased sensation during testing. The examination was also positive for mild constant pain, moderate intermittent pain, moderate paresthesias or dysesthesias, and moderate numbness. The examiner assessed the Veteran’s condition as moderate. The above evidence, when applied to DC 8520, demonstrates that an initial rating of 20 percent is warranted since June 8, 2017. The symptoms reflect moderate incomplete paralysis. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a, DC 8520. A higher rating of 40 percent requires evidence of moderately severe incomplete paralysis, which the evidence does not show. The Veteran’s symptoms were characterized as either mild or moderate and the decrease is muscle strength was mild in scale (rated as 4/5 instead of 5/5 which is normal). Furthermore, there is no evidence of more severe symptoms such as muscle atrophy. In considering the appropriate disability rating, the Board has considered the Veteran’s contention that his LLE radiculopathy is worse than the rating he receives. While the Veteran is competent to report symptoms because this requires only personal knowledge as it comes to him through his senses, he is not competent to identify the specific medical findings of his radiculopathy in accordance with the appropriate diagnostic codes. Rucker v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 67, 74 (1997); Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994); see also Cartright v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 24, 25 (1991) (“although interest may affect the credibility of testimony, it does not affect competency to testify”). On the other hand, such competent evidence concerning the nature and extent of the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy was provided by the VA medical personnel who examined him during the current appeal and who rendered pertinent opinions in conjunction with the evaluations. The medical findings (as provided in the examination report) directly address the criteria under which these disabilities are evaluated and are entitled to more weight than the Veteran’s lay assertions. The Board finally notes that the June 2017 VA examination established radiculopathy of the LLE involving the femoral nerve root in addition to sciatic nerve involvement. The service-connected disability does not identify the nerve root involvement, so is assumed to encompass all symptomatology of radiculopathy regardless of the nerve root involved, especially as the medical evidence does not distinguish the overall severity of his radiculopathy as associated with the different nerve roots involved. Mittleider v. West, 11 Vet. App. 181 (1998) For these reasons, an initial rating of 20 percent is warranted since June 8, 2017, for the Veteran’s LLE radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve. C. BOSELY Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Kutrolli, Associate Counsel