Citation Nr: 21003486 Decision Date: 01/21/21 Archive Date: 01/21/21 DOCKET NO. 17-35 177 DATE: January 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for psoriasis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability, to include hammertoes and degenerative arthritis of the right foot is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from June 1990 to October 1990 and from November 1990 to June 1991, including in the Southwest Asia theater of operations during the Persian Gulf War. He had additional service in the Army National Guard of Louisiana, to include periods of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) and inactive duty for training (INACDUTRA) from March 1990 to March 1998. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2016 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In a September 2019 Board decision, the Board granted the petition to reopen the claims of entitlement to service connection for psoriasis and hammertoes and degenerative arthritis of the right foot but denied the claims on the merits. Thereafter, the Veteran appealed the Board’s decision to the extent it denied the claims for service connection on the merits to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). By an August 2020 Order, the Court vacated the September 2019 Board decision to the extent it denied the claims of service connection on the merits and remanded the claims back to the Board for compliance with instructions pursuant to an August 2020 Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR). 1. Entitlement to service connection for psoriasis is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability, to include hammertoes and degenerative arthritis of the right foot is remanded. In the August 2020 JMPR, the parties agreed that the Board erred in the September 2019 Board decision by failing to provide adequate reasons and bases when it failed to address evidence in the record and determine whether the Veteran’s psoriasis and right foot disability were related to periods of ACDUTRA and/or INACDUTRA. In addition, the parties agreed that the Board failed to determine whether the duty to assist to obtain all Reserve or National Guard record was satisfied. Although some records were obtained, National Guard personnel records only reported the specific periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA from April 1995 through March 1996. As the record currently stands, the Board is unable to determine the nature of the Veteran’s service in the Army National Guard. Therefore, a remand is necessary to attempt to verify any periods of ACDUTRA or INACDUTRA. The Board further notes that the Veteran underwent VA examination in connection with his claims in April 2016. At that time, the examiner provided negative nexus opinions regarding whether the disabilities were related to active service. However, the Board finds that an addendum opinion is required to determine whether such disabilities were incurred in or related to periods of ACDUTRA and/or INACDUTRA. Updated treatment records should also be obtained upon remand. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of all medical care providers who have recently treated him for his claimed disabilities. After securing any necessary releases, the AOJ should request any relevant records identified. In addition, obtain updated VA treatment records. If any requested records are unavailable, the Veteran and his representative should be notified of such. 2. Undertake appropriate action to attempt to verify all of the Veteran’s periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA with the National Guard, to include the precise dates of each. Specific attempts must be made to verify periods of ACDUTRA and INACDUTRA. If any requested records are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. Efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts to obtain them would be futile. The non-existence or unavailability of such records must be verified, and this should be documented for the record. Required notice must be provided to the claimant and his representative. 3. Attempt to obtain the Veteran’s complete service treatment records and personnel records from his service in the Army National Guard through all appropriate sources. If any requested records are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. Efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts to obtain them would be futile. The non-existence or unavailability of such records must be verified, and this should be documented for the record. Required notice must be provided to the claimant and his representative. 4. After records development is completed, obtain a medical opinion to determine the etiology of the Veteran’s psoriasis. If a new examination is required in order to respond to the request, such should be scheduled. Following review of the claims file, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether any current psoriasis is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran’s periods of ACDUTRA and/or INACDUTRA. Please explain why or why not, to include addressing the significance, if any, of the in-service notations of psoriasis in October 1995, December 1995, February 1996 and June 1996. 5. After records development is completed, obtain a medical opinion to determine the etiology of the Veteran’s right foot disability, to include degenerative arthritis and hammertoes. If a new examination is required in order to respond to the request, such should be scheduled. (Continued on the next page)   Following review of the claims file, the examiner should provide an opinion as to whether any current right foot disability, to include degenerative arthritis and hammertoes, is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) incurred in or otherwise related to the Veteran’s periods of ACDUTRA and/or INACDUTRA. Please explain why or why not, to include addressing the significance, if any, of the in-service notations of right foot problems in October 1995, February 1996 and June 1996. ANTHONY C. SCIRÉ, JR Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Medina, 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.