Citation Nr: 21031288 Decision Date: 05/21/21 Archive Date: 05/21/21 DOCKET NO. 16-19 508 DATE: May 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, characterized as plantar fasciitis with tibial sesamoiditis (with symptoms of bilateral foot polysensory neuropathy), is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1981 to December 1984. As a matter of procedural background, this issue came before the Board in November 2019, at which time the Board issued a decision denying the Veteran's appeal. The Veteran appealed that denial to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In September 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) in which the parties agreed that the prior Board decision would be vacated and the issues returned to the Board for further development and appellate review, per the orders dictated in the JMR. The Board notes that the JMR identified specific inadequate reasons and bases in the Board's prior decision. 1. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, characterized as plantar fasciitis with tibial sesamoiditis (with symptoms of bilateral foot polysensory neuropathy), is remanded. The Veteran is seeking service connection for a bilateral foot disorder, characterized as plantar fasciitis with tibial sesamoiditis (with symptoms of bilateral foot polysensory neuropathy), that she alleges began in service. Specifically, she alleged that her foot disorder began due to the severe weather changes she first experienced in basic training. The Veteran was afforded a VA examination in July 2012, which included a negative nexus opinion. The parties, in the JMR, have agreed that that opinion is inadequate because the examiner failed to explain their reliance on the Veteran's separation examination. Specifically, the examiner failed to explain the significance of the Veteran's reported left foot pain and identified tendonitis one day following the separation examination. Additionally, the examiner failed to discuss how the Veteran's in-service diagnoses of achilles tendonitis stress and achilles tendonitis pain syndrome are inconsistent with her current diagnosed bilateral foot disorder As such, the Board will remand the Veteran's claim for service connection for a bilateral foot disorder for an addendum opinion from the July 2012 examiner to remedy the deficiencies of that examination. Should that examiner be unavailable, a new examination and opinion should be obtained. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain from the July 2012 examiner, should they be available, an addendum opinion in line with the below instructions. Should the July 2012 examiner be unavailable, the RO should obtain a new VA examination, from an appropriate clinician, to address the nature, extent, onset, and etiology of her bilateral foot disorder, characterized as plantar fasciitis with tibial sesamoiditis (with symptoms of bilateral foot polysensory neuropathy). The complete claims file should be made available to the examiner. The examiner should provide opinions as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent or greater probability) that her bilateral foot disorder is etiologically related to the Veteran's period of service. a) In their opinion, the examiner should address the Veteran's separation examination and speak to her foot pain and diagnosed tendinitis documented on the following day, and any potential relationship those have to her current disorder. b) Additionally, the examiner's opinion should address the in-service diagnoses of achilles tendonitis stress diagnosed in February 1982, and achilles tendonitis pain syndrome in April 1982, and explain any possible connection between those diagnoses and the Veteran's current disorder. All opinions should be accompanied by adequate reasons and bases. If the examiner cannot provide the requested opinion without resorting to mere speculation, they should provide a complete explanation stating why this is so. In so doing, the examiner should explain whether the inability to provide a more definitive opinion is the result of a need for additional information or that they have exhausted the limits of current medical knowledge in providing an answer to that particular question. 2. The RO should undertake any additional necessary development and readjudicate the Veteran's bilateral foot disorder service connection claim. B.T. KNOPE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Q. Hernan, Attorney Advisor