Citation Nr: A19001577 Decision Date: 09/26/19 Archive Date: 09/25/19 DOCKET NO. 190612-7603 DATE: September 26, 2019 ORDER New and relevant information having not been received, the request for readjudication of the claim for service connection for rheumatic heart disease (RHD) is denied. Service connection for status post aortic valve replacement as secondary to RHD is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a November 2005 rating decision, the Veteran’s claim for service connection for RHD was denied, and he did not appeal the decision within one year. 2. No new and relevant evidence has been received within the applicable evidentiary window to warrant readjudication of the claim. 3. Service connection not being in effect for RHD, there is no basis for service connection for status post aortic valve replacement on a secondary basis. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The November 2005 rating decision denying service connection for RHD became final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.302, 20.1103 (2018). 2. The criteria for readjudication of the claim for service connection for RHD are not met. 84 Fed. Reg. 138, 169 (Jan. 18, 2019) (to be codified at 38 C.F.R. § 3.156(d)). 3. The criteria for service connection for status post aortic valve replacement as secondary to RHD are not met. 38 U.S.C. § 5108 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.310 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from January 1962 to July 1962. On August 23, 2017, the President signed into law the Veterans Appeals Improvement and Modernization Act, Pub. L. No. 115-55 (to be codified as amended in various sections of 38 U.S.C.), 131 Stat. 1105 (2017), also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). This law creates a new framework for Veterans dissatisfied with VA's decision on their claim to seek review. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2019 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Whether new and relevant evidence was presented to warrant readjudication of the claim for service connection for RHD The Veteran’s service treatment records (STRs) contain a summary of the Veteran's medical history prepared in connection with a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) proceeding. The medical summary shows that in June 1962 the Veteran reported to sick call complaining of a pain in his chest. While diagnosing the complaint, several different heart murmurs were appreciated. A medical consultant diagnosed inactive RHD with aortic stenosis and insufficiency as well as mitral stenosis, Class 1, and evaluated the disorder as existing before entry into service. Based on this evaluation, the Veteran was found not to have met the physical requirements for service at the time of enlistment. The Veteran was discharged for that reason, with an Honorable character of service. The Veteran sought service connection for RHD in May 2005. A rating decision in November 2005 denied the claim. The reasons for the denial were that the disability had pre-existed service and was not shown to have been permanently aggravated beyond its normal course during service. The Veteran did not appeal this decision within one year, and it became final. The Veteran sought to reopen his claim in February 2019. A May 2019 rating decision declined to reopen the claim because new and relevant evidence had not been submitted to warrant reopening the claim. The Veteran appealed to the Board in June 2019 and in his Notice of Disagreement (NOD) chose the Evidence Submission docket. Under that docket, the Board may consider only the evidence that was before the RO when it made the original decision on appeal (here, November 2011), as well as additional evidence submitted to the Board with the NOD or received by the Board within 90 days after submission of the NOD. The Board may not consider evidence received by VA in the interim period. The Board notes that the Veteran submitted no additional evidence with the NOD or during the 90 days following submission of the NOD, and the Board has not received any other evidence during that period. Thus, the Board has received no new and relevant information to warrant readjudication of the claim, and consequently finds that readjudication is not warranted at this time. The Board notes that the Veteran submitted a statement in support of his claim in February 2019, after the RO’s decision to deny reopening. As noted above, that evidence was not submitted within the required evidentiary window, and thus has not been considered for the purposes of the Board’s decision here. The Board notes that if desired the Veteran may now file a Supplemental Claim and resubmit the statement and any additional evidence within the applicable evidentiary window or may appeal the present decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. (Continued on the next page)   Service connection for status post aortic valve replacement as secondary to RHD Under 38 C.F.R. § 3.310, a disability which is proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disease or injury shall be service connected. As the Board has found that the Veteran's claim for service connection for RHD does not warrant readjudication at this time and consequently remains denied, the Board finds that there is no basis for service connection for the claim of status post aortic valve replacement as secondary to RHD. Consequently, the Board finds that service connection for that claim is not warranted. JOHN Z. JONES Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board David S. Katz, 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.