Citation Nr: 21072189 Decision Date: 12/02/21 Archive Date: 12/02/21 DOCKET NO. 20-21 669 DATE: December 2, 2021 ORDER The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss is denied. The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy is denied. The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy is denied. The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for right lower extremity radiculopathy is denied. The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for left lower extremity radiculopathy is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran was denied service connection for hearing loss in a September 2010 rating decision. He did not perfect an appeal during the requisite time period, and the decision became final. 2. Evidence associated with the record since the September 2010 rating decision does not related to unestablished facts or raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for service connection for hearing loss. 3. The Veteran was denied service connection for bilateral upper and lower extremity radiculopathy in a March 2012 rating decision. He did not perfect an appeal during the requisite time period, and the decision became final. 4. Evidence associated with the record since the March 2012 rating decision does not related to unestablished facts or raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim for service connection for bilateral upper and lower extremity radiculopathy. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. New and material evidence has not been received since the September 2010 rating decision and the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is not reopened. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 2. New and material evidence has not been received since the March 2012 rating decision and the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy is not reopened. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 3. New and material evidence has not been received since the March 2012 rating decision and the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy is not reopened. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 4. New and material evidence has not been received since the March 2012 rating decision and the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for right lower extremity radiculopathy is not reopened. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 5. New and material evidence has not been received since the March 2012 rating decision and the claim seeking entitlement to service connection for left lower extremity radiculopathy is not reopened. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5108, 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from September 1969 to April 1971, including service in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a February 2019 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran has submitted new evidence pertaining to this appeal; he waived RO review of such evidence in October 2021. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c). New and Material Evidence If a claim of entitlement to service connection has been previously denied and that decision became final, the claim can be reopened and reconsidered only if new and material evidence is presented with respect to that claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5108. New evidence means existing evidence not previously submitted to agency decision-makers. Material evidence means existing evidence that, by itself or when considered with previous evidence of record, relates to an unestablished fact necessary to substantiate the claim. New and material evidence can be neither cumulative nor redundant of the evidence of record at the time of the last prior final denial of the claim sought to be reopened, and must raise a reasonable possibility of substantiating the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(a). The credibility of the evidence is presumed for purposes of reopening the claim. See Justus v. Principi, 3 Vet. App. 510, 513 (1992). The threshold for reopening is low. Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110, 117 (2010). The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss The RO denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for hearing loss in August 2006 and September 2010 rating decision, finding that the Veteran's hearing loss was not related to his military service. The Veteran did not file a notice of disagreement with the September 2010 rating decision, and failed to submit a timely substantive appeal. Therefore, the September 2010 rating decision is final. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156, 20.302, 20.1103. The evidence received since the September 2010 rating decision is not new and material to the claim of service connection for hearing loss. The Veteran has not submitted new evidence suggesting that his hearing loss disability is related to his military service or was caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability. Instead, he has submitted additional records showing treatment for his hearing and his statements that he believes the disability is related to his service. This evidence is cumulative to the evidence considered in the September 2010 rating decision and is therefore not material to the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. As new and material evidence has not been received, the petition to reopen the claim for entitlement to service connection for hearing loss is denied. The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for right upper extremity radiculopathy The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for left upper extremity radiculopathy The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for right lower extremity radiculopathy The petition to reopen the claim of service connection for left lower extremity radiculopathy The RO denied the Veteran's claim of service connection for bilateral upper and lower extremity radiculopathy in March 2012, finding that the Veteran's radiculopathy was not related to his military service. The Veteran filed a notice of disagreement with this rating decision, but after a Statement of the Case was issued, he failed to submit a timely substantive appeal. Therefore, the March 2012 rating decision is final. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.156, 20.302, 20.1103 (2010). The evidence received since the March 2012 rating decision is not new and material to the claim of service connection for radiculopathy. The Veteran has not submitted new evidence suggesting that his radiculopathy is related to his military service or was caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability. While a private August 2020 medical opinion relates bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy to the Veteran's back, he is not service-connected for a back disability. The Veteran has submitted additional records showing treatment for his radiculopathy and his statements that he believes the disability is related to his service. This evidence received is cumulative to the evidence considered in the March 2012 rating decision and is therefore not material to the claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. As new and material evidence has not been received, the petition to reopen the claim for entitlement to service connection for bilateral upper and lower extremity radiculopathy is denied. L. BARSTOW Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Hofmeister 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.