Citation Nr: 18141048 Decision Date: 10/09/18 Archive Date: 10/09/18 DOCKET NO. 14-28 951A DATE: October 9, 2018 REMANDED An initial rating in excess of 10 percent prior to April 2, 2010 and 60 percent thereafter for coronary artery disease (CAD) is remanded. Entitlement to an earlier effective date for special monthly compensation (SMC) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from July 1966 to May 1968. The Board notes the Veteran has been in receipt of a 100 percent disability rating from September 17, 2004. Regarding his claim for an increased rating for his heart disability, the Veteran contends he is entitled to a 30 percent rating from September 14, 2004 to his January 2006 surgery, 100 percent for the three months post-surgery, and 60 percent thereafter. (See May 2016 correspondence.) The Veteran has also pointed out there are medical treatment documents missing from his record. Specifically, records from the Phoenix, Arizona VA Medical Center (VAMC) from October 2004 to January 2005 are missing. These documents are relevant in that they could contain evidence the Veteran’s initial rating should have been higher than it is currently rated. Therefore, the Board finds a remand is necessary in order to obtain these records to ensure VA has a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran’s claim. If possible, the Veteran should attempt to obtain these records themself. The Board turns now to the Veteran’s claim of an earlier effective date for SMC. In a previous remand of these issues, the Board also remanded the issue of a clear and unmistakable error (CUE) claim of a December 1969 rating decision which granted service connection for a gunshot wound residuals and assigned a 20 percent disability rating for muscle group I. This issue had not been adjudicated by the RO and was remanded for adjudication. This matter was addressed in a March 2016 rating decision in which the RO increased the Veteran’s disability rating from 20 percent to 30 percent, effective September 17, 2004. However, the RO did not appear to adjudicate the Veteran’s CUE claim and appeared to treat it as an increased rating claim without addressing the Veteran’s claim that his initial rating should have been higher dating back to 1969. The Veteran contends that if his CUE claim is successful, he could have met the statutory requirements for SMC far earlier than his assigned September 17, 2004 date. Unfortunately, the CUE claim is not before the Board and the Board does not have jurisdiction over it. Therefore, as this matter is intertwined with the Veteran’s CUE claim, it is remanded to the RO to adjudicate after the CUE claim is properly addressed. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AOJ should obtain any of the Veteran’s outstanding VA and private medical records and associate them with the claims file. In particular, the AOJ should be sure to make all reasonable attempts to obtain medical treatment records from the Phoenix, Arizona VAMC between October 2004 and January 2005. All attempts and responses should be documented and associated with the Veteran’s file. If possible, the Veteran himself should submit any pertinent new evidence regarding the condition at issue in order to expedite the claim. 2. After undertaking any other appropriate development deemed necessary, including adjudication of the Veteran’s CUE claim, readjudicate the issues on appeal, including the claim of an earlier effective date for SMC. If the determinations remain adverse to the Veteran, he must be provided with a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time must then be allowed for a response before the record is returned to the Board for further review. JOHN J. CROWLEY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD A. Snoparsky, Associate Counsel