Citation Nr: 21000580 Decision Date: 01/05/21 Archive Date: 01/05/21 DOCKET NO. 16-01 696 DATE: January 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for left foot condition is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right foot condition is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the U.S. Air Force on active duty from May 1969 to May 1973. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from an April 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A hearing was held in this matter in April 2019, a transcript of which is associated with the record. This matter was previously remanded by the Board in August 2019 for additional development and has now returned for further appellate review. 1. Entitlement to service connection for left and right foot condition is remanded. While additional delay is unfortunate, the Board finds further development is required before the Veteran’s claim can be decided. Initially, the Board notes that a remand by the Board confers upon the claimant, as a matter of law, the right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). Pursuant to the August 2019 Board remand, the Veteran received a VA examination in September 2020. The examiner was specifically requested to identify any left and right foot impairments and to determine whether any such current foot conditions were at least as likely as not are related to or had their onset in active service, to include the Veteran’s military occupational specialty (MOS) pole climbing duties. While the examiner diagnosed the Veteran with bilateral pes planus and opined that the condition was less likely than not related to active duty service, the examiner failed to discuss the Veteran’s noted diagnoses of bilateral foot arthritis, hallux rigidus, and onychomycosis as illustrated in the Veteran’s VA and private treatment records. Accordingly, the examination is inadequate for determining entitlement to service connection for left and right foot conditions and does not substantially comply with the Board’s remand directives. As a result, remand is once again warranted for a new VA examination. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Notify the Veteran that he may submit lay statements from himself and from other individuals who have first-hand knowledge, and/or were contemporaneously informed of his in-service and post-service right foot and/or left foot problems. The Veteran should also be invited to submit medical evidence addressing whether it is at least as likely as not that his right foot and/or left foot problems are related to or had its onset in service. The Veteran should be provided an appropriate amount of time to submit this lay and medical evidence. 2. Schedule a VA examination (or telehealth interview, review of the record, etc. if an in-person examination is not feasible) the nature and onset of his left and right foot conditions. The examiner must acknowledge and discuss the competent lay statements regarding the Veteran’s in-service and post service right foot and left foot problems. The examiner shall: (a.) Identify any left and right foot impairment(s); (b.) Determine whether any current left and/or right foot conditions were at least as likely or not are related to or had their onset in active service, to include the Veteran’s MOS pole climbing duties; (Continued on the next page)   (c.) The examiner shall consider and discuss the lay statements of record, as well as the STR entries noting treatment for the left and right foot during service and all noted foot impairments located within the Veteran’s VA and private treatment records, to include bilateral arthritis of the feet, hallux rigidus, and onychomycosis. (d.) In responding to the above, the examiner must acknowledge and discuss the competent lay evidence relating to in-service and post-service right foot and left foot problems. STEVEN D. REISS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Gorum, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.