BVA9500997 
DOCKET NO.  91-49 409     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery,
Alabama

THE ISSUES

1.  Entitlement to service connection for chronic plantar warts.

2.  Entitlement to service connection for chronic jungle rot of
the feet.

3.  Entitlement to service connection for chronic tinea pedis.

4.  Entitlement to service connection for a chronic left foot
ulcer.

5.  Entitlement to service connection for bilateral pes cavus
deformity.

6.  Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a fracture
of the fifth metatarsal of the right foot.

7.  Entitlement to service connection for foot calluses.

REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by: The American Legion

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

M. Siegel, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The veteran served on active duty from September 1967 to October
1970, and on active and inactive duty training from October 1970
to June 1989.

This appeal initially arose from a rating decision of July 1991
from the Montgomery, Alabama, Regional Office (RO).  The Board of
Veterans' Appeals (Board) rendered a Remand decision in May 1992,
and the RO, following additional development of the record,
issued a rating decision dated in September 1992.  Thereafter the
Board, by means of a Remand decision dated in October 1993,
requested further development of the evidence.  In a rating
decision of June 1994, the RO confirmed and continued the prior
denials of service connection for the disabilities identified on
the first page of this decision.

REMAND

The veteran contends, in part, that the RO erred when it denied
service connection for bilateral pes cavus deformity.  He
specifically states that he began experiencing problems with his
arches while on reserve status, as a consequence of altering his
gait as a result of painful calluses.  It is noted that service
medical records dated in 1969 indicate the presence of a
bilateral "high arch deformity," and that pes cavus was
thereafter diagnosed.

After a review of the record, it is the opinion of the Board that
additional development of the medical evidence is necessary.  The
Board acknowledges that this case has been the subject of two
previous Remand orders; nonetheless, the Board believes that the
issue of service connection for bilateral pes cavus deformity
cannot be adjudicated without accomplishment of the development
identified below.  In particular, the Board must point out that
the report of the most recent clinical evaluation of the
veteran's feet, which is the report of the Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) examination conducted in April 1994, notes that
"[t]here is no obvious [foot] deformity present," and indicates a
"comment" by the examiner that "I can find no evidence of pes
cavus deformity."  In contrast, the report of a VA examination
conducted in May 1992, less than two years previously, notes the
presence of "[m]arked pes cavus bilaterally," and indicates
diagnoses to include "[p]es cavus bilaterally, acquired and
severe."  The additional development sought by the Board is
necessary to reconcile what appears to be findings that are
contradictory.

The United States Court of Veterans Appeals (Court) has held that
the duty of VA to assist veterans in the development of facts
pertinent to their claims, under 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West
1991) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1993), as set forth by

the Court in Littke v. Derwinski, 1 Vet.App. 90 (1990), requires
that VA accomplish additional development of the evidence if the
record currently before it is inadequate.  Accordingly, this case
is REMANDED for the following:

1.  The veteran should be accorded a VA
examination by an orthopedist who has not
previously evaluated or treated him, in
order to ascertain whether bilateral pes
cavus deformity is or is not manifested
and, if this deformity is in fact
manifested, whether it is developmental or
acquired in nature.  This examination
should be conducted in accordance with the
procedures stipulated in Chapter 2, Section
IX of VA's Physician's Guide for Disability
Evaluation Examinations.  All tests
indicated, to include but not limited to
radiologic studies, should be conducted at
this time.  The examiner should be
specifically requested to review the
evidentiary record, to include the
veteran's service medical records and the
reports of the VA examinations conducted in
May 1992 and April 1994, in determining
whether pes cavus deformity is actually
manifested.  All findings, and the reasons
and bases therefor, should be set forth on
the examination report in a clear,
comprehensive and legible manner.  The
claims folder is to be made available to
examiner prior to his or her evaluation of
the veteran.

2.  Following completion of the above, the
RO should again review the veteran's claim,
and determine whether service connection
for bilateral pes cavus deformity can now
be granted.  If the decision remains
adverse to the

veteran, he and his representative should
be provided with a supplemental statement
of the case, and with a reasonable period
of time within which to respond thereto.
The case should thereafter be returned to
the Board for further consideration, as
warranted.  (NOTE:  Notwithstanding a
decision with regard to the issue of
entitlement to service connection for
bilateral pes cavus deformity that is
favorable to the veteran, the case must be
returned to the Board for consideration of
the other issues on appeal identified on
the first page of this Remand decision,
appellate review of which has been deferred
pending completion of the actions requested
in this REMAND.)

The veteran need take no action until he is so informed.  The
purposes of this REMAND are to obtain additional medical evidence
and to ensure compliance with due process considerations.

Appellate review of the other issues identified on the first page
of this decision is deferred, pending completion of the actions
set forth above.

          LAWRENCE M. SULLIVAN
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

(CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE)

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___
(1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be
assigned to an individual member of the Board for a
determination.  This proceeding has been assigned to an
individual member of the Board.

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals.  This remand is in the nature of a
preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board
on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (1993).