Citation Nr: 18157535 Decision Date: 12/13/18 Archive Date: 12/12/18 DOCKET NO. 15-29 606 DATE: December 13, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for left foot condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service with the Army from November 2008 to November 2012. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2013 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). As a procedural matter, it is noted that in the December 2013 notice of disagreement, the Veteran listed the issue of “left foot pain/numbness” and also stated “should be both feet.” A right foot condition has been raised by the record, but has not been adjudicated by the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). As such, the matter is referred to the AOJ for appropriate action, to include informing the Veteran that a claim for benefits must be submitted on the application form prescribed by the Secretary of VA and providing such forms. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.150(a) (providing for furnishing of appropriate application form upon request for VA benefits); 38 C.F.R. § 19.9(b) (continuing to provide for Board referral of unadjudicated claims).   Entitlement to service connection for left foot condition is remanded. The Veteran contends that his left foot condition, claimed as pain and numbness, is service connected. A VA examination was conducted in August 2015. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with metatarsalgia and concluded “current left foot condition is less likely as not related to the military.” The only rationale provided was “no evidence of it being treated in the service.” This is an insufficient opinion. The opinion does not adequately address whether the Veteran’s current condition is connected to service. Lack of treatment during service cannot be used as the sole basis for concluding that there is no relationship between a veteran’s current disability and military service. Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 40 (2007). As such, a remand is necessary in order to obtain a more adequate opinion regarding direct service connection. In addition, the Veteran is currently service-connected for lumbosacral strain and left knee strain. Given the Veteran’s described symptoms of pain and numbness in the left foot, a new opinion is necessary to evaluate whether the symptoms are secondary to the service-connected back and/or knee issue. The matter of service connection for left foot condition is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Identify and obtain and pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Forward the Veteran’s claim to an appropriate examiner to provide an addendum opinion to the August 2015 VA examination regarding his left foot condition. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the addendum opinion. The examiner is asked to address the following: a) Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s left foot condition is etiologically related to, or had its onset during the Veteran’s active service. For purposes of this opinion, the examiner is asked to accept as true, the Veteran’s accounts of injury to his left foot during combat. The examiner is also asked to address the minimal time between discharge from service and the onset of his left foot complaints. If the left foot condition is not related to service: b) Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s left foot condition was caused by the Veteran’s service-connected conditions of lumbosacral strain and/or left knee strain. c) Provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s left foot condition was aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected conditions of lumbosacral strain and/or left knee strain. (Continued on the next page)   A complete rationale for all opinions should be provided. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals J. Jack, Law Clerk Department of Veterans Affairs