Citation Nr: 18140792 Decision Date: 10/05/18 Archive Date: 10/05/18 DOCKET NO. 14-36 509 DATE: REMANDED Entitlement to a bilateral foot disorder, to include arthritis, pes planus, plantar fasciitis, and a nerve disorder, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by a service-connected disability, is remanded. Entitlement to a bilateral toe disorder, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by a service-connected disability, is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1972 to December 1976. The Veteran filed claims seeking entitlement to service connection for multiple bilateral foot conditions. During the course of this appeal, the Veteran’s bilateral foot symptoms were diagnosed as pes planus, plantar fasciitis, arthritis, and a pinched nerve. Accordingly, the Board has re-characterized the Veteran’s claims as entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, to include arthritis, pes planus, plantar fasciitis, and a nerve disorder, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by a service-connected disability. See Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1 (2009). 1. Entitlement to a bilateral foot disorder, to include arthritis, pes planus, plantar fasciitis, and a nerve disorder, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by a service-connected disability, is remanded. 2. Entitlement to a bilateral toe disorder, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by a service-connected disability, is remanded. The Board acknowledges that the Veteran asserts that these disorders were caused by and/or aggravated by her service-connected disabilities, to include her service-connected bilateral hip disability. In this case, the Board observes that the Veteran was only granted service connection for a left hip disorder after the Regional Office (RO) issued its most recent statement of the case. Thus, while the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in April 2012 for her bilateral foot and toe disorders, the examiner did not address or discuss if her disorders were related to her left hip disability. Further, the examiner failed to address or discuss if the disorders on appeal were aggravated (i.e., worsened) by the Veteran’s numerous service-connected disabilities. Moreover, the Board notes that the Veteran submitted medical evidence, including the July 2014 VA treatment records which indicate these conditions may have worsened as a result of her service-connected disabilities. Therefore, the examination and addendum reports are inadequate to adjudicate these issues and a new examination is warranted. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). Additionally, the Board observes that new VA treatment records which directly pertain to the Veteran’s service connection claims have been obtained by the RO since the last supplemental statement of the case was issued. Therefore, a remand is required in order for the RO to consider the evidence and for the issuance of an appropriate SSOC. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1304(c). 3. Entitlement to TDIU is remanded. As for the Veteran’s TDIU claim, the Board is unable to adjudicate this claim until the above development is completed. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991) (two issues are “inextricably intertwined” when they are so closely tied together that a final Board decision cannot be rendered unless both are adjudicated). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any and all treatment records from the VA Medical Center in Hampton, Virginia since March 2018, and any other VA facility from which the Veteran has received treatment. If the Veteran has received additional private treatment, she should be afforded an appropriate opportunity to submit them. 2. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of her bilateral foot and toe disorders. The claims file must be reviewed, including the new records and such review should be noted in the opinion. The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that any currently diagnosed bilateral foot or toe disorder is etiologically related to the Veteran’s period of service, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated (i.e., worsened) by her service-connected disabilities. Additionally, the examiner is instructed that pain alone can be a disorder for VA compensation purposes if the pain results in functional impairment, even if there is no identified underlying diagnosis. Therefore, if no diagnosis is rendered for the Veteran’s bilateral foot and/or toe disorders, the examiner should provide etiological opinions as to whether or not these disorders cause pain with functional limitation, and if so, if the pain is etiologically related to the Veteran’s period of service, to include as secondary to and/or aggravated by (i.e., worsened) her service-connected disabilities. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Meyer, Associate Counsel