Citation Nr: 18142246 Decision Date: 10/15/18 Archive Date: 10/15/18 DOCKET NO. 16-22 866 DATE: October 15, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disability, to include as secondary to service-connected disabilities, is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral plantar fasciitis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the Army from February 1985 to August 1993. These matters are before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2014 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board acknowledges that prior February 2012 and August 2013 rating decisions denied service connection for a lumbar spine condition. The Veteran submitted new and material evidence within a year of issuance of the rating decisions in these claims; as such, the prior decisions did not become final, and the claim of service connection for a lumbar spine disability is being considered as an original service connection claim, without determining whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a finally denied claim. 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(b). The Board notes that the Veteran had initially appealed issues seeking higher ratings for a psychiatric disorder, right and left knee disorders, and a left shoulder disability, and service connection for a right shoulder condition, a bilateral hip condition, and a bilateral ankle condition. The April 2016 statement of the case addressed these issues, and the Veteran’s May 2016 VA Form 9, Appeal to Board of Veterans’ Appeals, indicated that these issues were being appealed. However, a subsequent May 2016 written statement from the Veteran, received prior to when the case was transferred to the Board, indicated that the appeal of these issues was being withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(b). Therefore, the issues will not be further addressed in this decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a lumbar spine disability, to include as secondary to service-connected disabilities, is remanded. The Veteran underwent a VA examination of his back in July 2011. The examiner concluded that the Veteran’s back condition was not related to the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral knee condition. The rationale provided was merely that the opinion was based on the medical record review of history and examination. Such is not an adequate rationale for the conclusion reached as it does not clearly explain the reasoning behind the opinion provided. Additionally, the VA examiner did not address causation or aggravation of the back condition by the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral plantar fasciitis, as requested in the Veteran’s claim. Moreover, a June 2012 letter from the Veteran’s chiropractor, B.H., indicates his opinion that the Veteran’s lumbar spine disability is due to overcompensation because of the biomechanical dysfunction of his knees and feet. However, this opinion also does not contain a rationale for the conclusions reached. Further, in his VA Form 9, the Veteran also argued that his back condition was caused or aggravated by his service-connected fibromyalgia. Given these various factors, remand is necessary to obtain a new examination and opinion that adequately addresses the etiology of the Veteran’s lumbar spine disability. Additionally, in March 2018, the Veteran submitted a March 2018 letter from the Social Security Administration (SSA) indicating that the Veteran receives SSA disability benefits. However, the record does not show for which disability or disabilities the Veteran receives SSA disability benefits. The SSA may be in possession of evidence pertinent to the Veteran’s claim for degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, and thus a remand is required to allow VA to request these records. 2. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral plantar fasciitis is remanded. As noted above, the record contains a March 2018 letter from the SSA indicating that the Veteran receives SSA disability benefits. As the record does not show which disability or disabilities this benefit is intended to compensate, records from the SSA may be pertinent to the Veteran’s claim for plantar fasciitis, and therefore a remand is required to allow VA to request these records. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s federal records from the SSA. Document all requests for information as well as all responses in the claims file. 2. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records for the period from August 2016 to the present. 3. After obtaining all additional records, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any lumbar spine disability. Any necessary testing related to the Veteran’s claim should be conducted. The examiner must provide opinions on the following questions: (a.) Is it at least as likely as not that any lumbar spine disability is related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, including filling and throwing sandbags into a truck in 1990? (b.) Is it at least as likely as not that any lumbar spine disability is (1) caused by the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral knee condition, bilateral plantar fasciitis, or fibromyalgia or (2) aggravated beyond its natural progression (i.e., any increase in severity beyond the natural progression) by the Veteran’s service-connected bilateral knee condition, bilateral plantar fasciitis, or fibromyalgia? A complete rationale for all opinions must be provided. If the clinician cannot provide a requested opinion without resorting to speculation, it must be so stated, and the clinician must provide the reasons why an opinion would require speculation. The clinician must indicate whether there was any further need for information or testing necessary to make a determination. Additionally, the clinician must indicate whether any opinion could not be rendered due to limitations of knowledge in the medical community at large and not those of the particular examiner. M. SORISIO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD R. Dean, Associate Counsel