Citation Nr: 21065335 Decision Date: 10/25/21 Archive Date: 10/25/21 DOCKET NO. 19-37 403 DATE: October 25, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral pes planus is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral plantar fasciitis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hammer toes is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for hallux rigidus of the right foot is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served from August 1966 August 1969. This case stems from a January 2018 application for disability benefits. In September 2020, the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) issued a decision denying service connection claims for bilateral pes planus, bilateral plantar fasciitis, bilateral hammer toes, and hallux rigidus of the right foot. The Veteran appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans' Claims (CAVC). A July 2021 Joint Motion for Remand was issued, and the four claims are once again before the Board. Bilateral pes planus. The Veteran contends that his bilateral pes planus should be service connected. In January 2018, the Veteran stated that during boot camp, his right heel would become painful and that he marched on the balls of his feet to ease the pain. He added that he experienced foot pain during service, and as a technician, his job entailed constantly climbing in and out of aircraft cockpits and walking on fuselages. In April 2018, the Veteran was seen by a VA examiner. The examiner opined that Veteran's pes planus, which clearly and unmistakably existed prior to service, was not aggravated beyond its natural progression by an in-service event, injury, or illness. The examiner reasoned that, "[b]ased on the evidence available it is less likely as not that the 4 years in the service had no [sic] lasting effect on his flat feet, planter[sic] fasciitis and arthritis. It is more likely that the 50 + years since service is the factor causeing[sic] the persent [sic] condition." The examiner's medical opinion did not address Appellant's lay statements of pain in service. The examiner's opinion is inadequate because it did not address the Veteran's lay statements. See Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet.App.at 303, 310-11 (2007); see also Miller v. Wilkie, 32 Vet. App. 249, 258 (2020). A new examination and medical opinion are necessary to address the Veteran's lay statements of pain in service and since service when determining whether his pes planus was aggravated beyond its natural progression. Bilateral plantar fasciitis. Bilateral hammer toes. Hallux rigidus of the right foot. The Board realizes that in remanding this claim for bilateral pes planus, the Veteran will have his feet examined again. This examination may produce evidence that is germane to the claims for bilateral plantar fasciitis, bilateral hammer toes, and hallux rigidus of the right foot, including whether bilateral pes planus caused and/or aggravated these disabilities. Thus, these issues are intertwined. Therefore, the Board finds it is the Veteran's interest to remand these claims so that a decision can incorporate any subsequent findings. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the etiology of the Veteran's bilateral pes planus, bilateral plantar fasciitis, bilateral hammer toes, and hallux rigidus of the right foot. The examiner must review the claims file and should note that review in the report. The examiner should address the Veteran's lay contentions including, the January 2018 statement that that during boot camp, the Veteran's right heel would become painful and that he marched on the balls of his feet to ease the pain, as well as the statement that the Veteran experienced foot pain during service, and as a technician, his job entailed constantly climbing in and out of aircraft cockpits and walking on fuselages. a. The examiner should determine the severity of the Veteran's bilateral pes planus and determine if the Veteran's bilateral pes planus was aggravated beyond its natural progression. The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely not (50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran's time in service aggravated bilateral pes planus beyond its natural progression or whether any aggravation of bilateral pes planus beyond is otherwise related to service. A rationale for the opinion must be provided. b. The examiner should determine the nature and etiology of bilateral plantar fasciitis. A complete history of onset and symptoms should be elicited from the Veteran. The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely not (50 percent or greater probability) that bilateral plantar fasciitis had its onset in service, within one year of separation from service, or is otherwise related to service, including being aggravated beyond its natural progression. c. The examiner should determine the nature and etiology of bilateral hammer toes. A complete history of onset and symptoms should be elicited from the Veteran. The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely not (50 percent or greater probability) that bilateral hammer toes had its onset in service, within one year of separation from service, or is otherwise related to service, including being aggravated beyond its natural progression. d. The examiner should determine the nature and etiology of hallux rigidus of the right foot. A complete history of onset and symptoms should be elicited from the Veteran. (Continued on the next page) The examiner must opine as to whether it is at least as likely not (50 percent or greater probability) that hallux rigidus of the right foot had its onset in service, within one year of separation from service, or is otherwise related to service, including being aggravated beyond its natural progression. JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board P. Chalker, 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.