Citation Nr: 21006708 Decision Date: 02/05/21 Archive Date: 02/05/21 DOCKET NO. 16-19 659 DATE: February 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral tarsal tunnel syndrome, as secondary to service-connected lumbar spinal stenosis (back disability), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1965 to May 1967, including service in the Republic of Vietnam. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from an April 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a hearing with the undersigned in July 2019. The Board denied this claim in October 2019, and the Veteran appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In June 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) in which the parties agreed to vacate the October 2019 decision and remand the matters to the Board. Although the Board regrets additional delay, remand is necessary to obtain a new VA opinion. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in April 2014. The examiner opined that the Veteran’s tarsal tunnel syndrome is typically caused by inherent ankle or foot problems and not due to spinal stenosis. The examiner did not provide a rationale for this opinion, nor did the examiner address whether the Veteran’s back disability aggravated his bilateral tarsal tunnel syndrome. Remand is necessary to obtain an additional opinion with rationale. The examiner is asked to consider EMG/NCS studies performed in August 2020 as well as the July 2014 private treatment records indicating EMG was consistent with neuropathy. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: The claims file should be sent to an appropriate examiner to offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s current bilateral tarsal tunnel syndrome is (a) caused by, or (b) aggravated by (worsened beyond natural progression) his service-connected back disability. In offering the opinion, the examiner is asked to consider the EMG/NCS results from 2014 and August 2020. The need for an examination is left to the discretion of the examiner. A rationale for all opinions offered is requested as adjudicators are precluded from making any medical findings. Nathan Kroes Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Hofmeister, Attorney Advisor 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.