Citation Nr: 21070079 Decision Date: 11/22/21 Archive Date: 11/22/21 DOCKET NO. 13-18 434 DATE: November 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia is remanded. Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1994 to February 1995. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2010 rating decision. The Veteran was afforded a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in March 2015. In July 2015, the Board remanded the issues for further development. The matter was returned to the Board for appellate review. The Board issued a decision on the issues in June 2018 which was appealed to the CAVC. In February 2020, the CAVC issued a Memorandum Decision which remanded the issues to the Board for further adjudication. In September 2020, the Board remanded the claims for further development. The matter has returned to the Board for appellate review. 1. Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia is remanded. 2. Entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia is remanded. In the September 2020 Board remand, the Board directed the AOJ to obtain a VA examination to determine the current severity of the Veteran's bialteral foot disabilty by a podiatrist. The Veteran was afforded a VA foot examination in February 2021. The examination was completed by Dr. K.F., a general practitioner with specializations in orthopaedic sports medicine and orthopaedic surgery. In the September 2020 Board remand, the Board directed the AMO to consider whether the Veteran's stress fractures of her knees and feet should be rated as four separate disabilities rather than two separate disabilities. The Board directed the AMO should also consider whether the Veteran is entitled to separate compensable ratings for plantar fasciitis, pes cavus, and bone spur of the right foot. The AMO issued a February 2021 SSOC which did not address whether the Veteran's stress fractures of the knees and feet should be rated as four separate disabilities rather than two separate disabilities. The February 2021 SSOC also did not address whether the Veteran is entitled to separate compensable ratings for her other foot disabilities. Unfortunately, there has not been substantial compliance with the Board's previous remand directives regarding the issues of entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia and entitlement to an increased evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia. Another remand is required. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Afford the Veteran a VA examination to determine the current severity of her bilateral foot disability by a podiatrist. The Veteran's claims folder must be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. All indicated tests and studies should be accomplished, and all clinical findings should be reported in detail. The examiner should also provide an opinion on the following: (a) Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran's plantar fasciitis was caused OR aggravated by her service connected left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia and right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia? Please explain why or why not. (b) Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran's pes cavus was caused OR aggravated by her service connected left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia and right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia? Please explain why or why not. (c) Is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran's bone spur of the right foot was caused OR aggravated by her service connected left femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, left medial tibial plateau, grade I; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia and right femoral condyle, grade II; stress fracture, right medial tibial plateau, grade III; tibial stress changes with chondromalacia? Please explain why or why not. 2. The AMO should consider whether the Veteran's stress fractures of her knees and feet should be rated as four separate disabilities rather than two separate disabilities. The AMO should also consider whether the Veteran is entitled to separate compensable ratings for plantar fasciitis, pes cavus, and bone spur of the right foot. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Alexia E. Palacios-Peters, 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.