Citation Nr: 21030942
Decision Date: 05/20/21	Archive Date: 05/20/21

DOCKET NO. 16-41 009
DATE: May 20, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder is remanded.		

Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disorder is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had a period of active duty service in the Army from October1977 to January 1978. He also had a period of active duty in the Reserves as a member of the Army National Guard from July 1982 to July 1984. The Veteran also testified before the undersigned at a Board hearing in February 2019 for the above claims.  A transcript is of record.

In July 2019, the Board remanded these issues for additional development. The Board finds that while some development was accomplished, there remains one issue that needs clarification. 

1. Entitlement to service connection for a left ankle disorder is remanded.

2. Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disorder is remanded.

An August1997 duty slip, apparently associated with some type of training, reveals that the Veteran reported left heal pain and was diagnosed with a left heel strain and fasciitis.  He was prescribed running shoes for the remainder of camp and placed on a 48-hour profile. The record does not give any indication as to whether the Veteran was participating in active duty for training, or inactive duty for training at the onset of the August 1997 left foot and left ankle complaints.  It appears however, that the Originating Agency has determined that it was active or inactive duty of some type, and has requested medical opinions on whether current pathology is related to this incident.

The Originating Agency (AOJ) made several attempts at obtaining an adequate opinion between this event and current pathology.  Examiners have essentially held that the Veteran's left foot and ankle problem pre-existed the August 1997 findings.  The AOJ asked several times for an opinion on aggravation, and the response is essentially that there is "no nexus" between the August 1997 findings and current findings.  There does not appear, however, to be a clear finding on the matter of aggravation with a complete medical rationale.  As such, to ensure that the duty to assist is fulfilled, additional opinion is needed.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

1. Forward the entire claims folder for an addendum opinion on whether the findings of August 1997 reveal aggravation of a pre-existing injury resulting in any current left foot or ankle impairment.  The records should be forwarded to an examiner with appropriate expertise to enter an opinion and a complete rationale for the opinion entered is requested.  It is not sufficient to say only that "no nexus" has been established. 

If an examiner cannot provide any of the requested opinions, he/she must affirm that all procurable and assembled data was fully considered, and a detailed rationale must be provided for why an opinion cannot be rendered.

2. The AOJ must ensure that the examiner's report complies with this remand and answers the questions presented in the request. The AOJ must also ensure that the examiner documents consideration of the electronic claims file. If the report is insufficient, the AOJ should take corrective action.

 

 

MICHAEL D. LYON

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Harris, Michael E.

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.