Citation Nr: 18160114
Decision Date: 12/21/18	Archive Date: 12/21/18

DOCKET NO. 17-52 145
DATE:	December 21, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral flat feet with right foot hammer toes and hallux valgus is remanded.
REASONS FOR REMAND 
The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from April 1987 to January 2014.  He also had service with the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve from May to August 1985.
This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2014 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina.
Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for bilateral flat feet with right foot hammer toes and hallux valgus is remanded.
The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) is required to furnish a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) if it associates VA-generated evidence with the claims file after a statement of the case (SOC) or the most recent SSOC has been issued and before the appeal is certified and the appellate record is transferred to the Board.  38 C.F.R. § 19.31(b)(1) (2017).
In the present case, after the most recent SOC in June 2017, new evidence was associated with the Veteran’s claims file in August 2017.  The evidence consists of the report of a VA examination of the Veteran’s feet.  As the evidence is VA-generated and pertinent to the pending appeal, the appeal must be remanded for the AOJ to consider the evidence in the first instance.
This matter is REMANDED for the following action:
After accomplishing any additional development deemed necessary (to include obtaining updated VA treatment records and a current VA examination, if indicated), readjudicate the claim on appeal based on the entirety of the evidence, to include any relevant evidence received since issuance of the last relevant SOC.  If the benefit sought on appeal is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, he and his representative should be furnished an appropriate SSOC and be afforded the requisite opportunity to respond. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board if otherwise in order.
 
DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	A. Pierce, Associate Counsel