Data story · October 26, 2026 · Data as of October 26, 2026
Radiculopathy and leg neuropathy VA claims: the back, diabetes and what the Board grants
How the Board of Veterans' Appeals decides radiculopathy and peripheral neuropathy of the legs (DC 8520): why these claims rise or fall with the back or diabetes claim, how often each secondary route wins, Agent Orange, and how VA rates them.
What is DC 8520?
The diagnostic code for the sciatic nerve in 38 CFR 4.124a. VA uses it for radiculopathy of the legs (a pinched nerve from the spine, often called sciatica) and for peripheral neuropathy of the legs. At the Board, 21,509 veterans had a radiculopathy ruling and 13,190 a neuropathy ruling from 2020 to 2025.
The two conditions share a code but usually come from different places. Radiculopathy comes from the spine, so it is claimed secondary to a back condition. Peripheral neuropathy most often comes with diabetes. Radiculopathy was granted 30.3% of the time and neuropathy 22.8%.
How does VA rate radiculopathy of the leg?
Under DC 8520, from 10 percent (mild incomplete paralysis) to 80 percent (complete paralysis, with foot drop), each leg rated separately. The first note to the spine formula in 38 CFR 4.71a says nerve problems from a spine condition are rated separately from the spine itself.
Each leg counts as its own claim, and the Board often decides both legs in the same decision.
The leg claim follows the back or diabetes claim
Can radiculopathy be secondary to a back condition?
Yes, under 38 CFR 3.310(a), and the back is the condition it is most often claimed secondary to: the Board granted 1,648 of 4,081 (40.4%). The leg claim follows the back. When the same decision granted the back, radiculopathy was granted for 815 of 921 veterans (88.5%); when it denied or remanded the back, 15 of 1,608.
Radiculopathy: back granted in the decision
Radiculopathy: back not granted
Neuropathy: diabetes granted in the decision
Neuropathy: diabetes not granted
Share of decided claims granted; a remand counts as not granted. One count per veteran. Service-connection issues only. 'Not granted' = denied or remanded in the same decision.
When the back was denied or remanded, the radiculopathy claim was almost always denied or remanded with it, because a secondary claim needs a service-connected condition to attach to. For 2,078 veterans, the decision had no back service connection issue at all (for example, because the back was already service connected); there the Board granted 23.3%.
Can neuropathy of the legs be secondary to diabetes?
Yes. Diabetes is the second most common route: 876 of 2,384 granted (36.7%). When the same decision granted diabetes, neuropathy was granted for 512 of 742 veterans (69.0%); when it did not, 17 of 1,552.
| Claimed secondary to | Granted | Veterans | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Back condition | 1,648 | 4,081 | 40.4% |
| Diabetes | 876 | 2,384 | 36.7% |
| Lumbar strain | 270 | 595 | 45.4% |
| Degenerative disc disease | 162 | 313 | 51.8% |
| Intervertebral disc syndrome | 43 | 85 | 50.6% |
| Knee condition | 25 | 177 | 14.1% |
All DC 8520 claims
Back condition
Lumbar strain
Degenerative disc disease
Intervertebral disc syndrome
Diabetes
Knee condition
Share of decided claims granted; a remand counts as not granted. One count per veteran. Secondary claims are the ones the Board marked as secondary to that condition.
Claims made secondary to a knee condition did much worse (14.1%), likely because a knee does not affect the spinal nerve roots, so the medical link is harder to make.
Agent Orange
Is peripheral neuropathy presumptive for Agent Orange?
Only early-onset peripheral neuropathy, listed in 38 CFR 3.309(e), and under 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6)(ii) it must reach a compensable level within a year of the last herbicide exposure. Later neuropathy needs a direct link or another route, most often secondary to diabetes, itself presumptive for herbicide exposure.
Decisions that mention Agent Orange or other herbicides held 5,230 of these claims, and the Board granted 26.1%, close to the overall rate. Thai air bases did better: Udorn 49.0% (73 of 149) and U-Tapao 46.2% (84 of 182).
Look up your client's group
Every base, exposure, job and medal with at least 15 decided claims under DC 8520, 143 groups in all; 12 fall under a presumption.
- Bar: share of this group's radiculopathy and leg neuropathy claims the Board granted. Red line: all radiculopathy and leg neuropathy claims, 27.1% granted. A bar past the line won more often than usual.
- ×
- More often than usual: how much more often radiculopathy and leg neuropathy comes up in this group's decisions than in all Board decisions. It shows how common the condition is here, not how often it wins.
- Set aside
- For groups VA does not presume, veterans whose decision shows service VA already presumes for radiculopathy and leg neuropathy (for example Vietnam or Thailand for Agent Orange) are left out, because for them the presumption is the answer.
Camp Samae San
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)58.8% granted · 10 of 17
3.3×more often
Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)49.0% granted · 73 of 149
1.8×more often
Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Korat, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)47.7% granted · 62 of 130
1.6×more often
U-Tapao Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)46.2% granted · 84 of 182
1.9×more often
Tan Son Nhut Air Force Base
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)38.2% granted · 13 of 34
2.0×more often
Ubon Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)38.1% granted · 24 of 63
1.7×more often
Nakhon Phanom Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)36.8% granted · 25 of 68
1.6×more often
Don Muang Royal Thai Air Force Base
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)33.3% granted · 5 of 15
2.4×more often
Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)32.3% granted · 31 of 96
2.1×more often
Da Nang AFB
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)32.1% granted · 51 of 159
1.6×more often
Fort Knox
26.3% granted · 5 of 19 · 11 with presumptive service set aside
0.6×more often
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California
20.0% granted · 6 of 30 · 13 with presumptive service set aside
0.6×more often
Fort Benning
17.6% granted · 6 of 34 · 16 with presumptive service set aside
0.7×more often
Camp Lejeune
16.9% granted · 39 of 231 · 124 with presumptive service set aside
0.6×more often
Fort Jackson
16.7% granted · 5 of 30 · 7 with presumptive service set aside
0.6×more often
Fort Hood
15.4% granted · 4 of 26 · 9 with presumptive service set aside
0.5×more often
Cam Ranh Bay Air Base
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)13.9% granted · 5 of 36
1.6×more often
Fort Lewis, Washington
12.5% granted · 2 of 16 · 13 with presumptive service set aside
0.9×more often
Fort Bragg
10.0% granted · 3 of 30 · 12 with presumptive service set aside
0.5×more often
Fort McClellan, Alabama
8.7% granted · 6 of 69 · 114 with presumptive service set aside
1.4×more often
Andersen AFB, Guam
Presumed by law · 38 CFR 3.309(e)7.7% granted · 3 of 39
1.7×more often
Fort Sill, Oklahoma
6.7% granted · 1 of 15 · 5 with presumptive service set aside
0.6×more often
Fort Campbell
5.3% granted · 1 of 19 · 11 with presumptive service set aside
0.8×more often
26 more groups: too few claims to judge once veterans with presumptive service are set aside
- USS Ticonderoga: 3 of 20 claims left, 17 set aside
- Eglin AFB, Florida: 2 of 22 claims left, 20 set aside
- USS Constellation: 2 of 19 claims left, 17 set aside
- USS Midway: 4 of 18 claims left, 14 set aside
- Fort Gordon (Eisenhower): 14 of 42 claims left, 28 set aside
- Subic Bay Naval Station: 5 of 40 claims left, 35 set aside
- Fort Carson: 12 of 19 claims left, 7 set aside
- USS Kitty Hawk: 3 of 20 claims left, 17 set aside
- USS Independence: 7 of 15 claims left, 8 set aside
- USS Saratoga: 4 of 15 claims left, 11 set aside
- Lackland AFB, Texas: 9 of 17 claims left, 8 set aside
- Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland: 5 of 15 claims left, 10 set aside
- Camp Casey: 5 of 73 claims left, 68 set aside
- USS America: 10 of 27 claims left, 17 set aside
- Fort Bliss: 12 of 15 claims left, 3 set aside
- Fort Polk: 12 of 24 claims left, 12 set aside
- Fort Dix, NJ: 14 of 30 claims left, 16 set aside
- Fort Belvoir: 11 of 16 claims left, 5 set aside
- Camp Red Cloud: 0 of 26 claims left, 26 set aside
- Clark Air Force Base, Philippines: 2 of 17 claims left, 15 set aside
- Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri: 13 of 26 claims left, 13 set aside
- Fort Ord: 10 of 23 claims left, 13 set aside
- Kadena AFB: 1 of 40 claims left, 39 set aside
- Kadena Air Force Base, Okinawa, Japan: 1 of 34 claims left, 33 set aside
- USS Kearsarge: 2 of 17 claims left, 15 set aside
- USS Ranger: 2 of 33 claims left, 31 set aside
Read the decisions
Recent decisions, with the Board's reasoning as summarized by AI:
- , December 2025: radiculopathy of both legs granted secondary to a low back condition the Board service connected in the same decision; a VA exam confirmed the diagnosis and the link.
- , December 2025: neuropathy of both legs granted secondary to service-connected type II diabetes; a VA exam found the link.
- , December 2025: peripheral neuropathy of both legs granted as at least as likely as not related to herbicide agent exposure, with reasonable doubt resolved in the veteran's favor.
- , December 2025: radiculopathy of both legs claimed secondary to the back, denied; the Board denied the back in the same decision and found the leg symptoms started years after service.
What the data cannot tell you
The counts follow the diagnostic code, so they include some claims for other nerve problems rated under it. Radiculopathy and neuropathy are told apart by the claim's wording. The back and diabetes comparison shows what the same decision contained, not what caused the result. Historical outcomes, not predictions.
For representatives
- Win the back or the diabetes claim first; the leg claim rarely survives without it.
- Ask for nerve findings on the back exam (reflexes, sensation, strength) so each leg can be rated separately.
- For neuropathy in a herbicide-exposed veteran, check whether it started within a year of exposure; otherwise build the diabetes route or a direct opinion.
Explore the data
Read the decisions behind this story
VA Law Explorer finds the decisions, quotes the reasoning and writes a research memo.
Ask VA Law ExplorerAbout the data
Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions 2020-2025 (decoder_ring.theories, decoder_ring.presumptions, decoder_ring.secondary_history, bva_cases_v2 lead basis), diagnostic code 8520. Each veteran is counted once per condition, at the best ruling in the decision (granted, then remanded, then denied); grant share = granted / all decided, so a remand counts as not granted. 'More often than usual' compares how often the condition comes up for a group with how often it comes up across all decisions. Groups overlap and are identified from what the decision text mentions; a mention is not proof of service there or of exposure. Historical outcomes, not predictions. Queried October 26, 2026. Every figure in this story is computed from the query results, and the AI-extracted data can contain errors. The figures are fixed as of that date. Related research pages describe their own data dates and methods.
VA Law Explorer Weekly
New data stories, M21-1 and 38 CFR changes, and updates to the Board decision data, in one email a week. Free; unsubscribe anytime.
We send this newsletter only. See our privacy policy.
Where this data comes from
- Claim
- Regional office decides
- Veteran appeals
- Board decides
- Granted · Denied · Remanded: back to the regional office
Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions show how VA's highest review body applies 38 CFR and weighs evidence on contested claims.
Each one is an appeal: a regional office decided the claim first, and the veteran appealed. So these rates describe the Board, not a veteran's odds at the regional office, where most claims are decided and whose decisions are not public.
More on what Board decisions can and cannot tell you