Citation Nr: 21013394 Decision Date: 03/09/21 Archive Date: 03/09/21 DOCKET NO. 15-36 470 DATE: March 9, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for bilateral foot condition, to include bilateral heel spur, plantar fasciitis, and left food Morton’s neuroma, is remanded. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 2011 to February 2013. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from May 2013 and February 2016 rating decisions issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This case was most recently before the Board in July 2020, at which time it was remanded for further development, as discussed below. The Board finds that the remand directives were not substantially complied with and thus another remand is warranted. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The Board in July 2020 also remanded the claims of service connection for sinusitis and a right ankle condition. 09/11/2018, BVA Decision. An October 2020 rating decision granted service connection for sinusitis and right ankle disabilities. As these grants constitute a full grant of the service connection benefit sought, and these issues are no longer before the Board. Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156, 1158-59 (Fed. Cir. 1997).   Entitlement to service connection for bilateral foot condition, to include bilateral heel spur, plantar fasciitis, and left food Morton’s neuroma, is remanded. A July 2020 Board decision remanded the claim of service connection for a bilateral foot condition. The Board directed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to obtain any outstanding records of pertinent medical treatment from VA or private health care providers. After the completion of the aforementioned development, the AOJ was directed to schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s bilateral foot conditions. An October 2020 VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s bilateral foot conditions are less likely than not related to his period of active service. The examiner considered the Veteran’s lay statements regarding the onset of symptoms during active service but remarked that servicemembers typically have foot pain due to field work and marching. The rationale otherwise relied on lack of treatment records regarding any foot condition prior to a diagnosis of bilateral plantar fasciitis and Morton’s neuroma in 2015, multiple years after separation from service in February 2013. 10/01/2020, C&P Exam. The Veteran also contends that his bilateral foot conditions are proximately due to or aggravated by his right ankle condition, which has recently become a service-connected disability per the October 2020 rating decision. 05/11/2016, Form 9. Upon review of the record, none of the VA examinations and medical opinions adequately address the Veteran’s theory of entitlement that his bilateral foot conditions are proximately due to or aggravated by his right ankle condition. Accordingly, the Board finds that all of the examinations and medical opinions are incomplete to adjudicate this issue, to include on a secondary basis, at this time and an addendum opinion is necessary.   This matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain any outstanding VA treatment records. Additionally, request the Veteran to submit any relevant private treatment reports or provide VA with authorization to obtain any such records related to the bilateral foot condition on appeal. 2. After completing directive #1, obtain an addendum opinion from an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s bilateral foot conditions. An in-person examination is not required unless deemed necessary by the clinician. The clinician is to review the virtual file, including a copy of this Remand. The clinician is to address the following: It is at least as likely as not (probability of 50 percent or more) that the Veteran’s bilateral foot conditions are either 1) proximately due to OR 2) aggravated by a service-connected disability, to include a right ankle condition. If an in-person examination is deemed necessary, then one should be scheduled. If an examination is scheduled, all pertinent symptomatology and findings must be reported in detail. Any indicated diagnostic tests and studies should be accomplished. The claims file should be made available to the examiner. A comprehensive rationale for all opinions is to be provided. All pertinent evidence, including both lay and medical, should be considered. If an opinion cannot be given without resorting to speculation, the examiner should explain why and state whether the need to speculate is due to a deficiency in the state of general medical knowledge (no one could respond given medical science and the known facts), the record (additional facts are required), or the examiner (does not have the knowledge or training). Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board David Han 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.