Citation Nr: 21062044 Decision Date: 10/06/21 Archive Date: 10/06/21 DOCKET NO. 17-45 907 DATE: October 6, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right ankle disorder is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left foot Morton's neuroma is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot strain is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left foot plantar fasciitis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right foot plantar fasciitis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for left foot pes planus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for right foot pes planus is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had honorable active-duty service from May 17, 2005 to May 16, 2009 and is the recipient of the Combat Action Ribbon. The Veteran also had active-duty service from May 17, 2009 to June 6, 2012 which is dishonorable for VA purposes. These matters are before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a February 2017 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned at a July 2021 Board hearing. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral ankle disorders, bilateral pes planus, bilateral plantar fasciitis, left foot Morton's neuroma and left foot strain is remanded. At his July 2021 Board hearing the Veteran reported the onset of foot and ankle symptoms during training in 2005 or 2006, with continuous symptoms since that time. The Veteran has not been afforded VA examinations to address the nature and etiology of his claimed ankle disorders. As the Veteran has credibly reported the onset of ankle symptoms during his period of honorable service, with continuous symptoms since that time to the present, remand is required to obtain VA examinations to consider the nature and etiology of the claimed ankle disorders. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). The Veteran was provided VA examination for his claimed foot disorders in November 2016 and February 2017. In November 2016, the examiner diagnosed left foot flat foot, Morton's neuroma, and plantar fasciitis, but opined that the disorders were less likely than not related to an August 2005 in-service injury on the basis that the records did not document an ongoing chronic left foot injury. The examiner did not address the Veteran's report of continuous foot symptoms following the in-service injury. In February 2017, the examiner diagnosed bilateral flat foot, bilateral plantar fasciitis, and left foot Morton's neuroma. The examiner did provide any etiological opinion regarding those disorders. The lack of medical documentation alone is not a valid basis for a medical opinion where the Veteran's lay statements must be considered. Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1336 n.1 (Fed. Cir. 2006) (noting that VA's examiner's opinion, which relied on the absence of contemporaneous medical evidence, "failed to consider whether the lay statements presented sufficient evidence of the etiology of [the veteran's] disability such that his claim for service connection could be proven without contemporaneous medical evidence"). As the November 2016 examiner apparently dismissed the Veteran's reports of continuous symptoms based on the absence of corroborating documentation alone, remand is required to obtain an adequate medical opinion which considers those statements. The Veteran's April 2005 service entrance examination noted mild asymptomatic pes planus and thus, the presumption of soundness does not attach with regard to this condition. 38 C.F.R. § 3.306. While the Veteran has reported an increase in foot symptoms during service, it is unclear whether such symptoms specifically represent an increase in severity of pes planus. On remand, the examiner must opine whether the preexisting pes planus underwent an increase in severity during service which was not clearly and unmistakably due to the natural progression of the condition. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: Schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of right and left ankle and foot disorders. The examiner must review the claims file, including the hearing transcript. The examiner should state: a. What diagnosed right and left ankle and foot disorders have been present at any time since October 14, 2016? b. For any diagnosed pes planus: did it at least as likely as not undergo an increase in severity during the Veteran's period of honorable active-duty service (May 17, 2005 to May 16, 2009)? 1) If yes, is it clear and unmistakable that the increased severity IS NOT due to the natural progression of the disease? c. For each diagnosed right and left ankle and foot disorder other than pes planus: is it at least as likely as not related to an illness, event, or injury during the Veteran's period of honorable active-duty service (May 17, 2005 to May 16, 2009), to include the reported injuries to the feet and ankles during training and deployment in 2005 and 2006? The examiner must discuss the Veteran's lay report of an onset of bilateral ankle and foot symptoms in service with continuous symptoms thereafter. If the examiner finds the lay reports are insufficient to support the claim, the examiner must clearly explain why that is the case. Please be aware that lay evidence does not lack credibility merely because it is unaccompanied by contemporaneous medical evidence. LAURA E. COLLINS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Bametzreider, Paul J. 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.