Citation Nr: 21070032 Decision Date: 11/22/21 Archive Date: 11/22/21 DOCKET NO. 18-28 980 DATE: November 22, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for radiculopathy of the bilateral lower extremities (BLE) to include as secondary to a back disability is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence of record is against finding that the Veteran has a current radiculopathy disability of the bilateral lower extremities, or any functional impairment related thereto. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for radiculopathy of the BLE have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from May 1966 to May 1968. 1. Entitlement to service connection for radiculopathy of the BLE, to include as secondary to a back disability Service connection may be granted for a disability resulting from a disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Substantiating a claim of service connection generally requires evidence of: (1) a current disability (for which service connection is sought); (2) incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service; and (3) a nexus between the claimed disability and the disease or injury in service. See Shedden v, Principi, 381 F.3d 1153, 1166-1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The Veteran seeks service connection for radiculopathy of the BLE, to include as secondary to his service-connected back disability. The Board finds, however, that the preponderance of evidence of record, to include multiple VA examinations, reveals no evidence of any complaints, treatments, or diagnoses for any type of neurological disability of the bilateral lower extremities. As such, the Veteran's claim for service connection must be denied. Here, a close review of the Veteran's service treatment records (STRs) and contemporaneous VA/private medical records show no evidence of complaints or treatment for any neurological disabilities for either lower extremity. While such records reveal several incidents where the Veteran was noted complaining of numbness and tingling of the upper extremities, to include his fingers and arms, no such complaints had been noted regarding either lower extremity during the claims period. Indeed, even in his lay statements, to include his hearing at the RO, the Veteran was noted complaining of pain and tingling in his arms, hand, and fingers, while saying nothing of such symptoms in his lower extremities. To this end, the Board notes that the Veteran has been afforded several VA examinations that assessed the nature and etiology of his claimed radiculopathy, to include a January 2020 back examination, and a May 2021 peripheral nerve examination. The Board notes that in both examination reports, no radicular symptoms regarding the lower extremities were found upon examination; both revealed normal sensory and reflex results. In fact, neither examiner noted any subjective complaints regarding either lower extremity during the examination. The question for the Board is whether the Veteran has a current disability that began during service or is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease. In this regard, the Board concludes that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of a neurological disability causing any functional impairment in his BLE and has not had one at any time during the pendency of the claim or recent to the filing of the claim. Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 294 (2013). Here, not only does the competent medical evidence fail to provide any evidence of a disability, the claims file is also silent on any subjective complaints of symptoms or functional loss by the Veteran. As such, the Board finds that the Veteran's claim fails to overcome the threshold element of a current disability. While the Veteran believes he has a current diagnosis of a neurological condition affecting his BLE, he is not competent to provide a diagnosis in this case. The issue is medically complex, as it requires specialized training of the nervous system. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377, 1377 n.4 (Fed. Cir. 2007). Consequently, as there is no diagnosis of a current BLE radiculopathy disability, the claim for service connection must be denied. DELYVONNE M. WHITEHEAD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Ziheng Zhu, 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.