Citation Nr: 21065129
Decision Date: 10/25/21	Archive Date: 10/25/21

DOCKET NO. 18-25 881
DATE: October 25, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for flat feet is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The appellant is a Veteran who served on active duty from June 1976 to December 1982. These matters are before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a July 2016 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision. In June 2021, a videoconference hearing was held before the undersigned; a transcript is associated with the claims file. At the hearing, the Veteran was granted a 90-day abeyance period for the submission of additional evidence. That period has lapsed; no additional evidence was received.

Entitlement to service connection for flat feet is remanded.

During the June 2021 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that his feet "hurt a little" on separation from military service; that he worked on his feet in his postservice employment; and that the pain from flat feet became unbearable three or four years ago. His representative argued that the Veteran's flat feet could be related to an injury in service at Fort Hood, Texas in April 1978. Service treatment records include an April 1978 health record notation of a complaint of left heel pain. The Veteran reported that the tenderness is most pronounced when waking up in the morning and when he first stands up. Tenderness on palpation of the medial heel area of the left foot was noted. The Veteran was referred to a physician's assistant for further evaluation. An examination of the foot revealed no edema, erythema, full range of motion, and no objective findings.  The current record meets the low threshold standard for determining when an examination to secure a nexus opinion is necessary. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006). A remand for such examination is necessary.

The matter is REMANDED for the action:

Arrange for the Veteran to be examined by an appropriate clinician to ascertain the likely etiology of his flat foot disability. His claims file must be reviewed. The examiner should:

(a.) Identify the likely etiology for the bilateral flat foot disability. Is it at least as likely as not (a 50% or better probability) that it is  etiologically related directly to (was incurred or aggravated in) service?

(b.) If the flat feet are determined to be unrelated to service, identify the etiology that is considered to be more likely, and explain why that is so.

All opinions must include complete rationale. 

 

 

GEORGE R. SENYK

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Lederman, Michael

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.