Citation Nr: 21000264 Decision Date: 01/05/21 Archive Date: 01/05/21 DOCKET NO. 19-07 472 DATE: January 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for heart disease, to include residuals of a coronary artery bypass is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1996 to April 1998. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2016 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2019, the Board denied service connection for heart disease, to include residuals of a coronary artery bypass. In December 2019, the Veteran appealed the Board’s decision denying service connection for heart disease to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court), which, in July 2020, granted a Joint Motion for Remand (JMR). The Court’s order vacated the Board’s August 2019 decision and remanded the matter to the Board consistent with the terms of the joint motion. Entitlement to service connection for heart disease, to include residuals of a coronary artery bypass is remanded. The parties agreed that VA provided inadequate medical examinations to the Veteran for his claim of entitlement to service connection for heart disease. Specifically, the JMR indicated that the VA examiner failed to provide an adequate opinion addressing whether the Veteran’s hypertension aggravated his heart disability. Given the concerns expressed in the JMR, the Board finds that remand is necessary. By this remand, the Board makes no determination, express or implied, concerning the credibility of any statements on file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Associate with the record any outstanding VA and private treatment records. 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination with an appropriate medical professional to determine the nature and etiology of his heart disability. The Veteran’s electronic claims file must be made accessible to the examiner in conjunction with the examination. This review should include the Veteran’s service treatment records, post-service medical treatment records, and the assertions of the Veteran and his representative, along with any other information the medical professional deems pertinent. A note that this information was reviewed should be included in the opinion. The examiner must provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., a 50 percent or greater probability) that the Veteran’s heart disease, to include residuals of a coronary bypass, was aggravated by his service-connected hypertension. Why or why not? If aggravation is found, the examiner should identify the baseline level of severity of the heart disability before the onset of aggravation or by the earliest medical evidence created at any time between the onset of aggravation and the receipt of medical evidence establishing the current level of severity of the heart disability. The examiner’s opinion must reflect consideration of lay and medical evidence of record, to include: (a.) Newly submitted, October 2020 Treatise Evidence. (b.) The June 2018 letter from Dr. Noelck. A complete rationale for all findings and conclusions must be provided. The examiner is advised that the Veteran is competent to report his symptoms and history, and such reports must be specifically acknowledged and considered in formulating any opinions. 3. Then, readjudicate the claim. If the determination of the claim remains unfavorable to the Veteran, then issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case and afford him a reasonable period of time to respond before returning the case to the Board. KELLI A. KORDICH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Palombi, 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.