Citation Nr: 18153052
Decision Date: 11/28/18	Archive Date: 11/27/18

DOCKET NO. 16-43 175
DATE:	November 28, 2018
REMANDED
Entitlement to service connection for bilateral pes planus, with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction, is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND
The appellant served on active duty in the United States Army from September 1982 to September 1985.  
This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2014 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) wherein the appellant was denied entitlement to service connection for bilateral pes planus, with posterior tibial tendon dysfunction.  
The appellant contends that his bilateral pes planus is causally related to his active service.  The Board notes that while the appellant underwent a VA examination of his feet in May 2014, this examination did not offer an opinion on the etiology of the appellant’s pes planus, although the disability was noted on the examination.  As such, the Board finds that remand is necessary to obtain a medical opinion on the etiology of the appellant’s diagnosed bilateral pes planus.   
On remand, the examiner should address the appellant’s lay statements that his bilateral pes planus was caused by running, road marching, and standing while in active service.  The examiner should also consider the significance and nature of the appellant’s service in the 101st Airborne Division when considering the etiology of his pes planus.  Further, the Board notes that the appellant is already service connected for arthritis of the right foot and, as such, the examiner should opine as to whether the appellant’s pes planus is secondarily related to, or aggravated beyond its normal progression by, the appellant’s service connected right foot arthritis.    
The matter is REMANDED for the following action:
1. Obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician regarding whether the appellant’s bilateral pes planus is at least as likely as not related to his reports of running, road marching, and standing during active service.  The examiner should consider the nature of the appellant’s service in the 101st Airborne Division when rendering this opinion.  The examiner should also opine as to whether the disability is proximately due to the appellant’s service-connected right foot arthritis, or is aggravated beyond its natural progression by his service-connected right foot arthritis.  
 
K. Conner
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	K. Kleponis, Associate Counsel