Foot (incl. plantar fasciitis, flat feet) decisions — 2010

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral pes planus has been found to be mild, with no indication of moderate flatfoot or other disabling conditions. The disability does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation.

The Board has ordered the case to be remanded for further development due to inadequate opinions regarding the etiology of the Veteran's low back disorder, left hip degenerative joint disease, and hammertoes of the right foot.

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 30 percent for bilateral pes planus was granted. The claim to reopen his service connection for bilateral arthritis of the foot, which is secondary to his service-connected bilateral pes planus, was also granted.

The Board has determined that additional development is necessary prior to adjudication of the Veteran's claims for service connection for a right ankle condition and a right foot disability, both claimed as secondary to his service-connected right knee disability.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for right foot hammer toe and hallux valgus were denied. The Board found no evidence to support a relationship between these conditions and her service or any events therein.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for various conditions, including low back disability, sinusitis, allergic rhinitis, eye disorder (compound hypermetropic astigmatism), nausea, groin pain, flat feet, and stress fractures of both feet. The primary reason was a lack of current medical evidence supporting these claims.

The Veteran's claims for service connection and initial compensable ratings are being remanded due to the need for additional development.

The Veteran's claims for increased ratings for bilateral pes planus with plantar fasciitis and left knee status post meniscectomy were denied as the evidence did not show that his conditions warranted a higher rating.

The Veteran's pes planus is characterized by moderate flat feet with pain on use. The Board finds that the criteria for a rating in excess of 10 percent are not met, as his symptoms do not include objective evidence of deformity or calluses.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a new VA examination based on the Veteran's recent testimony about worsening symptoms of his service-connected bilateral plantar fasciitis and right knee disability.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral foot disability and chronic sinusitis, finding that there was no evidence of in-service injury or disease related to these conditions.

The Veteran's appeal for increased ratings for her right foot disability and allergic rhinitis and sinusitis was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating under the applicable diagnostic codes.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for bilateral knee and foot disabilities are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including a VA examination.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the need for additional examinations and development of his claims.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for right foot disabilities, including a lumbosacral strain, were denied as there was no evidence of their onset or aggravation during active duty service. The Veteran is currently rated at the highest available schedular rating for his left great toe disability.

The Veteran does not have a diagnosed disability of the back, hips, ankles, right knee, or feet that is related to his military service. The Board finds that the evidence does not support granting service connection for any of these disabilities.

The Veteran's service-connected bilateral pes planus with hallux valgus deformity of the great toes is currently rated at 30 percent, and his vasomotor rhinitis is rated as noncompensable. The Veteran's migraine headaches are currently rated at 30 percent. The Board has granted increased ratings for both the bilateral pes planus and migraine headaches.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for certification for automobile and adaptive equipment or adaptive equipment only due to lack of loss of use of feet, hands, or vision. The Veteran is also denied TDIU as his combined disability rating does not meet the minimum schedular requirements.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and updated treatment records, as well as scheduling of a videoconference hearing.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development to determine if his service-connected disabilities render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.