Citation Nr: 21012527 Decision Date: 03/04/21 Archive Date: 03/04/21 DOCKET NO. 15-29 020 DATE: March 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a right foot disability, to include hallux valgus, hammertoes, and right great toe arthritis is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability, to include hallux valgus and hammertoes is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1969 to August 1971. This case is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2014 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2019, the Veteran testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge regarding his service connection claims for a bilateral feet disability. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the electronic claims file. In November 2019, the Board remanded the service connection claims for a bilateral feet disability for more development. In the same decision, the Board also remanded other issues unrelated to the bilateral feet claims for issuance of Statement of the Case by the RO. Now the service connection claims for right and left foot disabilities are returned to the Board. The Board notes that the Veteran requested a separate hearing for the other remanded issues of: entitlement to special monthly compensation based on aid and attendance and/or housebound status; applications to reopen service connection claims for a cervical spine disability, a lumbar spine disability, and a heart disability; and entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus. See June 2020 VA Form 9. Thus, those issues will be the subject of a future decision after conducting a Board hearing as requested. The Veteran is seeking service connections for his bilateral feet disability. As to his current disabilities of right and left foot, the Board notes that the record shows the Veteran’s diagnoses of bilateral hallux valgus and hammertoes, and right great toe arthritis. See e.g., November 2020 Foot Conditions Disability Benefits Questionnaire. As such, the Board has recharacterized the issues of the case to reflect the Veteran’s current diagnoses. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in November 2020 for feet conditions after the November 2019 Board’s Remand Order. The November 2020 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s claimed bilateral feet condition was less likely than not incurred in or caused by the claimed in-service injury, event, or illness and provided a rationale for the opinion. However, the examiner failed to consider the Veteran’s testimony of the onset of his feet troubles in service after wearing tight boots, which were one size smaller than his feet, and experiencing frostbite in his feet and toes in service. See November 2019 Board Remand Order, at 4-5; see also August 2019 Hearing Transcript, at 6-7. Thus, the Board finds that obtaining an addendum opinion to address the Veteran’s competent and credible testimony regarding his feet issues in service is necessary prior to final adjudication of the matters. Accordingly, the matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) must obtain an addendum opinion from the November 2020 VA examiner regarding the Veteran’s service connection claims for right and left foot disabilities. If the November 2020 VA examiner is not available, the requested opinion with rationale should be rendered by another appropriate medical professional. If the examiner determines that a new examination is necessary, the AOJ should schedule one for the Veteran. The examiner should review the Veteran’s claims file and a copy of this REMAND order before rendering the requested addendum opinion. (a.) The examiner must opine whether the Veteran’s current right foot disability is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to his service or had its onset in service. (b.) The examiner must opine whether the Veteran’s current left foot disability is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) related to his service or had its onset in service. (c.) The examiner is specifically asked to consider the Veteran’s August 2019 testimony before rendering the requested opinions. See August 2019 Hearing Transcript, at 6-7 (the Veteran testified that he was provided with boots that were too tight where they were one size smaller than his actual shoe size, and he had frostbite in feet and toes). The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinion. If the examiner rejects the Veteran’s reports, the examiner must provide an explanation for such rejection. (d.) The examiner asked to provide a complete written rationale for any opinion offered. Also, if the examiner cannot provide an opinion, the examiner must state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond based on given medical science and the known facts), a deficiency in the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner does not have the knowledge or training. 2. After completing the above actions and any other necessary development, the issues on appeal must be readjudicated. If the claims remain denied, a Supplemental Statement of the Case must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. E. Kim, 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.