Citation Nr: 21008728 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 19-25 896 DATE: February 17, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a back disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1963 to February 1966, with additional service in the Army National Guard of Missouri. The matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2018 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran seeks service connection for left ankle, back, and bilateral foot disabilities. He contends that these conditions are due to his demanding physical training during active service, to include completing jump school and being a member of the 101st Airborne Division and Special Forces Group. Alternatively, the Veteran contends that his conditions are due to a June 1982 incident during his two-week annual training at Camp Chaffee, in which he fell off of a truck and sought medical treatment. The Board notes that the Veteran’s Army National Guard Retirement Credits Record indicates that he had active duty for training (ACDUTRA) from June 12, 1982 to June 27, 1982. The Board regrets further delay, but additional development is necessary before the matter can be adjudicated. Specifically, the Board finds that remand is required in order to obtain adequate VA medical opinions. Where VA provides a veteran with an examination in a service connection claim, the examination and medical opinion must be adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 311 (2007). Here, the Veteran was afforded VA examinations for the claimed disabilities in April 2018. The examiner concluded that the Veteran’s left ankle, back, and bilateral foot disabilities were less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness. The Board finds that the VA medical opinions are inadequate as the opinions are largely based on the absence of treatment in service. See Dalton v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 23, 40 (2007). Additionally, the examiner did not consider the Veteran’s lay statements regarding onset and duration of his symptoms as well as his physical training and duties during active service. Accordingly, the Board finds that remand is necessary to obtain addendum medical opinions regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s left ankle, back, and bilateral foot disabilities. Moreover, the Board notes that the Veteran’s National Guard personnel and medical records are outstanding and pertinent to the claims on appeal. Upon remand, these records should be obtained and associated with the record. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA treatment records. 2. Contact the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), the Records Management Center (RMC), the Veteran’s National Guard unit(s), and any other appropriate location, to request the Veteran’s service personnel and treatment records from his National Guard service. If any requested records are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yield negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. 3. After completing directives #1-2, forward the claims file to a qualified medical professional to obtain an addendum medical opinion regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s back, left ankle, and bilateral foot disabilities. If the examiner determines that another VA physical examination is necessary, such an examination should be scheduled. Following a review of the claims file, the examiner is asked to opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s back, left ankle, and bilateral foot disabilities manifested in or are otherwise etiologically related to his active service or a period of ACDUTRA in June 1982. In rendering the requested opinion, the examiner is asked to consider and address the Veteran’s lay statements regarding onset and continuity of symptoms. Specifically, the examiner is asked to consider and comment on the Veteran’s contentions that his conditions are due to his physical training and duties during active service, to include completing jump school and being a member of the 101st Airborne Division and Special Forces Group, as well as his reported June 1982 incident during a period of ACDUTRA. Moreover, the examiner is asked to consider and comment on the submitted January 2019 correspondence from the Veteran’s treating physician that it is “reasonable to assume that some of the chronic injury that he now deals with is related to activities and injuries that occurred during his time in military service.” A complete rationale must be provided for all opinions provided. If an opinion cannot be offered without resort to mere speculation, the examiner must indicate why this is the case and what additional evidence, if any, would allow for a more definitive opinion. Nathaniel J. Doan Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Robinson, 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.