Citation Nr: 18147118 Decision Date: 11/02/18 Archive Date: 11/02/18 DOCKET NO. 14-00 719 DATE: November 2, 2018 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an initial rating higher than 10 percent for cervical radiculopathy in the right upper extremity is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an initial rating higher than 10 percent for cervical radiculopathy in the left upper extremity is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an initial rating higher than 10 percent for lumbar radiculopathy in the right lower extremity is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an initial rating higher than 10 percent for lumbar radiculopathy in the left lower extremity is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 23, 2010, for the award of service connection for cervical radiculopathy in the right upper extremity, is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 23, 2010, for the award of service connection for cervical radiculopathy in the left upper extremity, is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 23, 2010, for the award of service connection for lumbar radiculopathy in the right lower extremity, is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than June 23, 2010, for the award of service connection for lumbar radiculopathy in the left lower extremity, is remanded. The issue of entitlement to an effective date earlier than November 25, 2008, for the award of a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1962 to June 1965. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of a November 2010 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Houston, Texas. In July 2018, the Veteran testified in a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript of the hearing is included in the record and has been reviewed. The claims for increased ratings and for earlier effective dates are remanded. A remand of the claims on appeal is warranted for additional development. First, the Veteran indicated during the July 2018 hearing that his service-connected radiculopathy had worsened since the most recent VA compensation examination conducted over eight years ago in September 2010. He should be provided a new examination into his increased rating claims. See Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121 (1991). Second, there are many Spanish language documents in the claims file that have not been translated. Many of the untranslated documents had been included in the claims file prior to the transfer of the appeal to the Board. As translations should have been completed before transfer of the case to the Board, this action should be completed upon remand. Any additional Spanish language documents received upon remand must also be translated before returning the case to the Board. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Undertake appropriate development to obtain any outstanding records pertinent to the Veteran’s claims to the extent possible. Include in the record any outstanding VA treatment records, if any. All records/responses received must be associated with the electronic claims file. 2. Arrange for the translation of all Spanish language documents currently contained in the claims file, as well as any additional Spanish language documents that may be received upon remand. Each translation should be certified. 3. Schedule a VA compensation examination to determine the nature and severity of upper and lower extremity radiculopathy. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.124a, Diagnostic Codes 8615, 8620 (2018). The examiner should review the claims folder. In a report detailing the nature and severity of the disorders, the examiner should comment on the following: (a). With regard to the upper extremities – is the paralysis complete or incomplete? If incomplete, is it moderately or severely disabling? (b). With regard to the lower extremities – is the paralysis complete or incomplete? If incomplete, is the disability moderate, moderately severe, or severe with marked muscular atrophy? Please support any opinion provided with a full explanation. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Christopher McEntee, Counsel