Citation Nr: 21041748
Decision Date: 07/10/21	Archive Date: 07/10/21

DOCKET NO. 16-52 033
DATE: July 10, 2021

REMANDED

Entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability, to include status post left toe amputation (claimed as boot rot), is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from October 1979 to December 1979.  This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2015 rating decision.

Service connection for a left foot disability, to include status post left toe amputation (claimed as boot rot)

The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issue of entitlement to service connection for a left foot disability because no VA examiner has opined as to whether this condition is at least as likely as not the result of the Veteran's use of boots in wet conditions during service and because the non-VA November and December 2015 opinions lack a sufficient rationale on which the Board can rely.

Accordingly, these matters are REMANDED for the following actions:

Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination of his left foot condition.  The examiner must review the claims file in conjunction with this examination. Following review of the claims file and completion of a physical examination of the Veteran's left foot (including completion of any testing deemed necessary), the examiner should diagnose any left foot disabilities.  In this regard, the examiner is hereby notified that, if a left foot diagnosis cannot be provided but the Veteran's left foot condition manifests in symptoms that cause functional impairment, then the examiner should consider them a "disability" for the purpose of providing the requested opinion below.

For any such diagnosed left foot disability (including any finding of a left foot condition causing functional impairment), the examiner is asked to opine as to whether any such diagnosis/finding is at least as likely as not related to the Veteran's service, including working in boots in wet conditions?  

Provide a rationale to support the opinion. In crafting this rationale, the examiner's attention is directed to the opinions from November and December 2015 non-VA physicians who postulate a potential link between the Veteran's condition and his service. 

 

 

THERESA M. CATINO

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Steven H. Johnston, 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.