Citation Nr: 22019733 Decision Date: 04/02/22 Archive Date: 04/02/22 DOCKET NO. 17-25 715 DATE: April 2, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for a bilateral foot disability is remanded. The Veteran had active service in the Air Force from August 1975 to July 1987; October 1990 to September 1991; and May 1999 to August 1999, with additional periods of service including reserve service. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of a March 2015 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) that denied a claim of service connection for a bilateral foot disability. As reflected by her October 2021 hearing testimony, the Veteran contends that she suffers from a bilateral foot disability that had its onset during a period of active service. Service connection will be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred in or aggravated by active military service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Establishing service connection generally requires (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the present disability. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The Board finds that a remand is necessary to identify and verify the nature and circumstances of all periods of the Veteran's service; make additional efforts to obtain complete service treatment records (STRs); obtain additional medical records, to include any non-VA treatment records identified or provided by the Veteran; and obtain a VA medical examination to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed bilateral foot disability. Generally, to qualify for VA benefits, a claimant must be a "veteran" under the law. See Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473, 484 (2006). Under 38 U.S.C. § 101 (2) a "veteran" is defined as "a person who served in the active military, naval, or air service, and who was discharged or released therefrom under conditions other than dishonorable." The term "active military, naval, or air service" includes: (1) active duty; (2) any period of active duty for training (ACDUTRA) during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from a disease or injury incurred or aggravated in line of duty, and; (3) any period of inactive duty training (IDT) during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from an injury incurred or aggravated in line of duty. 38 U.S.C. § 101 (24); 38 C.F.R. § 3.6 (a). Thus, in determining a claimant's eligibility for VA benefits, a complete and accurate record of such claimant's period or periods of service, and the nature and circumstances thereof, is critical. The record currently before the Board reflects that the Veteran had active service in the Air Force from August 1975 to July 1987; October 1990 to September 1991; and May 1999 to August 1999, with additional periods of service, including reserve service. See 03/26/2015, Codesheet; 03/04/2004, STR Medical. However, the record does not reflect any complete accounting of all the Veteran's periods service. The Board also notes that it is unclear whether the Veteran's complete STRs have been associated with the claims file. The Board is frustrated in its ability to make such a determination by the lack of a complete accounting of the Veteran's periods of service. Further, the record currently before the Board does not include any discharge examinations associated with the periods of active service that have been identified, to include the initial period of active service from August 1975 to July 1987. VA's duty to assist in compensation claims includes a duty to obtain STRs and other relevant records pertaining to the claimant's active service. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A. Accordingly, the Veteran's claim should be remanded for the RO to attempt to obtain an accurate accounting of the Veteran's periods of service as well as any STRs associated with the Veteran's periods of service. Additionally, at her October 2021 hearing the Veteran testified that she had received treatment for her claimed disability from a private treating provider. On remand, the Veteran should be afforded an opportunity to identify any private providers from whom she has received treatment and receive VA's assistance in obtaining records from such providers consistent with 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(b). In this regard, the Board notes that in November 2014 VA received copies of an October 2014 Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) purporting to address the nature of the Veteran's claimed bilateral foot disability; the document reflects a diagnosis of bilateral hallux valgus. However, the document does not identify the individual who completed it; the final page appears to be missing. Thus, the Board cannot determine what degree of probative weight to assign the document at this time. On remand, the Veteran should be afforded another opportunity to submit a complete copy of the October 2014 DBQ. At her October 2021 hearing, the Veteran testified as to current pain in her bilateral feet. Laypeople are competent to report symptoms and experiences observable by their senses. See Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a). VA will provide a medical examination or obtain a medical opinion where there is: (1) competent evidence of a current disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability; (2) evidence establishing that an event, injury, or disease occurred in service; (3) an indication that the disability or persistent or recurrent symptoms of a disability may be associated with a veteran's service or with another service-connected disability, but (4) insufficient competent medical evidence to make a decision on the claim. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 82-83 (2006). The Board finds that the Veteran should be afforded a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed bilateral foot disability. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Take all necessary steps to verify all of the Veteran's period(s) of Active Duty, Active Duty for Training (ACDUTRA), Inactive Duty for Training (IDT), Active Duty for Special Work (ADSW), and/or any other periods of service. Reserve retirement point sheets are not adequate for this purpose; rather, the specific dates of the Veteran's periods of service, including Active Duty, ACDUTRA, ADSW, and IDT, are required. If this information or documentation is unavailable this fact should be documented, and a formal finding of unavailability should be made with notice to the Veteran and his/her representative and they should be given an opportunity to respond. 2. Following the completion of remand directive 1, obtain the Veteran's complete service treatment records from all periods of service and associate them with the claims file. If this information or documentation is unavailable this fact should be documented, and a formal finding of unavailability should be made with notice to the Veteran and his/her representative and they should be given an opportunity to respond. 3. Ask the Veteran to execute a VA form 21-4142 for all providers she has seen for her claimed bilateral foot disability. Obtain medical records from all providers identified by the Veteran in her executed VA Form 21-4142 and obtain all available VA treatment records. Ensure that all records obtained pursuant to this remand are associated with the claims file. 4. Request that the Veteran submit a complete copy of the October 2014 Disability Benefits Questionnaire, to include signature page. 5. Following the completion of remand directives 1 4, schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to determine the nature and etiology of any foot disabilities. The claims folder, including a copy of this remand, must be made available to the examiner and such review should be noted in the examination report. The examiner should identify and discuss any foot disabilities identified during the examination and the pendency of this claim. For each diagnosed disability, please respond to the following: (a.) Whether the Veteran's foot disability is at least as likely as not related to an in-service injury, event, or disease, or whether it first had its onset during a period of active service. (b.) Whether the Veteran's foot disability is at least as likely as not (1) proximately due to service-connected disability, or (2) aggravated beyond its natural progression by service-connected disability. (Continued on the next page) If aggravation is found, the examiner should also state, to the extent possible, the baseline level of disability prior to aggravation. This may be ascertained by the medical evidence of record and by the Veteran's statements as to the nature, severity, and frequency of her observable symptoms over time. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Sametshaw, Eric C. 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.