Citation Nr: 21010305 Decision Date: 02/24/21 Archive Date: 02/24/21 DOCKET NO. 15-01 441 DATE: February 24, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity, to include as secondary to service-connected back condition, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The probative evidence of record is at least in relative equipoise that the Veteran suffers from radiculopathy of the right lower extremity that is related to his service-connected back disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity, to include as secondary to service-connected back condition, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Marine Corps from July 1977 to April 1980. In April 2018, the Veteran was provided a hearing with the undersigned Veterans Law Judge and a transcript of the proceeding of record. The claim was brought before the Board in October 2018 and was remanded for further development. Service Connection Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). In order to establish service connection, the record must show competent evidence of three things: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship, i.e., a nexus, between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. Holton v. Shinseki, 557 F.3d, 1362, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2009). When considering such a claim for service connection, the Board must consider on a case-by-case basis, the competence and sufficiency of lay evidence offered to support a finding of service connection. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (quoting Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 Fed. Cir. 2007)). The mere conclusory or generalized lay statements that a service event or illness caused a current disability are insufficient. Waters v. Shinseki, 601 F.3d 1274, 1278 (2010). Entitlement to Service Connection: Right Lower Extremity Radiculopathy The Veteran contends that his radiculopathy of the right lower extremity is related to his active duty service, to include his back disability. Service connection on a secondary basis essentially requires evidence sufficient to show: (1) that a current disability exists; and (2) that the current disability was either caused or aggravated by a service-connected disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.310. Although a November 2020 examiner found the Veteran did not suffer from radiculopathy, the Board notes that in the Veteran’s October 2012 VA examination for his back disability, the examiner noted the Veteran did suffer radicular pain that affected his right lower extremity. The examiner also noted the radicular symptoms involved the sciatic nerve. The Board also notes that VA treatment records contain complaints of back pain that radiates to his right hip and leg, as well as a notation of treatment for spondylosis with radiculopathy. The Board lastly notes the Veteran has been service-connected for degenerative disease of the lumbar spine with spondylolisthesis. Therefore, due to the October 2012 VA examiner finding the Veteran did have radicular symptoms of the right lower extremity, as well as the Veteran being noted as having treatment for spondylosis with radiculopathy, the Board finds that the evidence is at least in relative equipoise that the Veteran suffers from radiculopathy of the right lower extremity that is related to hs service-connected back disability. The benefit of the doubt doctrine has been applied. See Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990); Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361 (Fed Cir. 2001). JENNIFER HWA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Negron, 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.