Citation Nr: 21065211 Decision Date: 10/25/21 Archive Date: 10/25/21 DOCKET NO. 13-29 529 DATE: October 25, 2021 ORDER A rating in excess of 30 percent for cervical strain with degenerative disc disease (DDD) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran had active duty from February to June 1975 and February 2003 to July 2004, along with periods of active duty for training and inactive duty for training; he has been rated at 100 percent since May 2018. 2. A cervical spine disability has been manifested by subjective complaints of pain and pressure; objective findings include no ankylosis or intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS). CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a rating in excess of 30 percent for cervical strain with DDD have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103(a), 5103A (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.3, 4.31, 4.59, 4.7, 4.71a, Diagnostic Codes (DCs) 5003-5237 (2021). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION As an initial matter, the Board remanded the claim in 2016, 2017, 2019, and 2020 for further development. The claim has now been returned for adjudication. Disability evaluations are determined by the application of a schedule of ratings which is based on average impairment of earning capacity. Generally, the degrees of disability specified are considered adequate to compensate for considerable loss of working time from exacerbations or illnesses proportionate to the severity of the several grades of disability. 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1. Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. The Veteran has been rated at 30 percent under DCs 5003-5237. While portions of the rating schedule addressing the musculoskeletal system were revised effective February 7, 2021, this diagnostic code was not changed. Specifically, the amended regulations clarify that DC 5243 is to be assigned only when there is disc herniation with compression and/or irritation of the adjacent nerve root; assign DC 5242 for all other disc diagnoses. No other changes were made to the rating criteria for the spine. Under the relevant diagnostic codes, a 40 percent rating is warranted when the objective medical evidence shows: unfavorable ankylosis of the cervical spine; or intervertebral disc syndrome (IVDS) with incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least four weeks but less than six weeks during the past 12 months. Turning to the medical evidence, ankylosis or IVDS have not been shown. Specifically, in an April 2010 VA examination, the Veteran complained of stabbing neck pain and pressure. Upon examination, ankylosis was not shown. Further, in an October 2016 VA examination, he complained of moderate cervical pain. Upon examination, there was no evidence of ankylosis or IVDS. In addition, in a May 2018 VA examination, he complained of weekly flareups of neck pain that lasted for hours and were aggravated by "overhead activities." However, upon examination, there was no evidence of ankylosis or IVDS. In the December 2020 Board remand, the Board remanded the claim for a new examination and explained that if ankylosis was not found, the examiner should opine as to whether the Veteran's range of motion (ROM) was so diminished that it was the functional equivalent of ankylosis. In a May 2021 VA examination, the Veteran complained of daily severe neck pain. Upon examination, the examiner marked that there was no evidence of ankylosis or IVDS. Further, in a June 2021 addendum opinion, the clinician wrote that the ROM was not so diminished that it was the functional equivalent of ankylosis. Based on the above, the medical evidence does not support a rating in excess of 30 percent for a cervical spine disability. In this regard, the medical evidence showed no ankylosis or IVDS and that the Veteran's ROM was not so diminished that it was the functional equivalent of ankylosis. While clinical records showed treatment for a cervical spine disability, they do not contradict these findings. Therefore, the medical evidence does not support a rating in excess of 30 percent. The Board has also considered the Veteran's lay statements that his disability is worse. While he 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 a specific level of disability of this disorder according to the appropriate diagnostic codes. Such competent evidence concerning the nature and extent of the Veteran's cervical spine disability has been provided by the medical personnel who have examined him during the current appeal and who have rendered pertinent opinions in conjunction with the evaluations. The medical findings directly address the criteria under which a cervical spine disability is evaluated. Moreover, as the examiners have the requisite medical expertise to render medical opinions regarding the degree of impairment caused by a cervical spine disability and had sufficient facts and data on which to base the conclusion, the Board affords the medical opinions great probative value. As such, these records are more probative than the Veteran's subjective complaints of increased symptomatology. In sum, after a careful review of the evidence of record, the benefit of the doubt rule is not applicable, and the appeal is denied. Finally, the Veteran has not raised any other issues, nor have any other issues been reasonably raised by the record, for the Board's consideration. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. App. 366, 369-370 (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). L. HOWELL Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Ragofsky, 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.