Citation Nr: 22018941 Decision Date: 03/30/22 Archive Date: 03/30/22 DOCKET NO. 14-26 325 DATE: March 30, 2022 REMANDED Service connection for a thoracolumbar spine condition. Service connection for a cervical spine condition. Service connection for a bilateral foot condition. Service connection for an eye condition. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1984 to March 1988. He had additional service in the Air Force Reserve. The case is on appeal from a December 2013 rating decision. In the July 2014 substantive appeal, the Veteran requested a Board hearing. After several postponements, the hearing was scheduled for February 2022; however, the Veteran failed to attend the hearing. The Veteran has not subsequently provided good cause for missing the hearing or requested that it be rescheduled. Therefore, the Board considers the Veteran's request for a hearing to be withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(e). 1. Service connection for a thoracolumbar spine condition. 2. Service connection for a cervical spine condition. 1. Service connection for a bilateral foot condition. 2. Service connection for an eye condition. The Veteran contends that he has back, neck, bilateral foot and eye conditions that are related to service. In his May 2013 statement, the Veteran contends that his back and neck conditions are a result of certain movements done during service. He stated his back and neck disorders have progressed into muscle spasms and limited range of motion. With regard to his bilateral foot disorder, he asserts the condition had its onset during service. He stated his foot problems are attributed to the years of wear and tear during service, including many hours spent on his feet. He further reported the military footwear he was provided caused his feet to become stiff and painful and he was engaged in constant high-impact exercises and training in service, which caused plantar fasciitis, heel spurs and Achilles tendinitis. With regard to his eye disorder, he asserts that his eye condition is a result of an eye surgery he underwent while in service, resulting in "squiggly lines" that pass in his vision periodically. The service treatment records (STRs) in the claims file include an April 1991 STR upon the Veteran's entry into Reserve service which indicated pes planus and flat feet. The Board notes in August 2013, VA made a formal finding that the Veteran's complete STRs and personnel records are unavailable. The Board finds that a remand is warranted to afford the Veteran a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed back, neck, foot and eye disorders. A Veteran is entitled to a VA examination where there is some indication that a claimed condition may be related to an in-service event or injury, and no examination has yet been conducted for Veteran's claimed conditions. See McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 81 (2006). In light of the remand, updated VA treatment records should be obtained. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain any relevant private and VA treatment records. 2. Thereafter, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed back, neck and feet disorders. The examiner should first identify any current back, neck and feet disorders. The examiner should then provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the disorders had their onset during, or are otherwise related to, service. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed eye disorder. The examiner should first identify any current eye condition. The examiner should then provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that the disorder had its onset during, or is otherwise related to, service. BRANDON B. ISAACS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Becton, 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.