Citation Nr: 21001262 Decision Date: 01/07/21 Archive Date: 01/07/21 DOCKET NO. 19-36 212 DATE: January 7, 2021 ORDER The restoration of 30 percent for arteriosclerotic heart disease, from March 1, 2018, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The RO’s decision to reduce the Veteran’s evaluation for arteriosclerotic heart disease from 30 percent to 10 percent was not supported by the evidence contained in the record at the time of the reduction. CONCLUSION OF LAW The evaluation for the service-connected arteriosclerotic heart disease is restored to 30 percent, from March 1, 2018. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1155, 5103, 5103A, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.105, 3.344, 4.104, Diagnostic Code 7005. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty from August 1964 to August 1967. This matter is on appeal from a December 2017 rating decision, wherein the regional office (RO) reduced the Veteran’s arteriosclerotic heart disease rating from 30 percent to 10 percent, from March 1, 2018. The Veteran had a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in January 2021. 1. Entitlement to the restoration of a 30 percent disability rating for arteriosclerotic heart disease. The Veteran has essentially claimed that even though the RO had reduced his arteriosclerotic heart disease rating based on VA examination findings, his ordinary conditions of life and work has not improved since he had been granted a 30 percent disability rating. Arteriosclerotic heart disease is rated pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.104, Diagnostic Code (DC) 7005, for arteriosclerotic heart disease (coronary artery disease). Under DC 7005, a 10 percent rating is warranted where a workload of greater than 7 METs but not greater than 10 METs results in dyspnea, fatigue, angina, dizziness, or syncope, or; continuous medication required. A 30 percent rating is warranted where a workload of greater than 5 METs but not greater than 7 METs results in dyspnea, fatigue, angina, dizziness, or syncope, or; evidence of cardiac hypertrophy or dilation on electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, or X-ray. In an October 2016 rating decision, the RO proposed decreasing the 30 percent disability rating to 10 percent. In a December 2017 rating decision, the RO reduced the rating to 10 percent, effective March 1, 2018. The United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has articulated three questions that must be addressed in determining whether a rating reduction was warranted by the evidence. First, a rating reduction case requires ascertaining whether the evidence reflects an actual change in the disability. Second, it must determine whether the examination reports reflect such changes were based upon thorough examinations. Third, it must be determined whether the improvement actually reflects an improvement in the Veteran’s ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. Brown v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 413, 421 (referring to 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.1, 4.2, 4.13). Congress has provided that a Veteran’s disability will not be reduced unless an improvement in the disability is shown to have occurred. 38 U.S.C. § 1155. When a RO makes a rating reduction without following the applicable regulations, the reduction is void ab initio. Greyzck v. West, 12 Vet. App. 288, 292 (1999). The Board finds that the RO’s decision to reduce the Veteran’s evaluation to a 10 percent disability rating was not supported by the evidence contained in the record at the time of the reduction (December 2017 rating decision). Per the October 2016 rating decision that proposed reduction, the RO found that the medical evidence from the September 2016 VA examination revealed that the Veteran’s condition did not warranted a 30 percent evaluation. The VA examiner found that although the Veteran reported activities and restrictions consistent with a METs level of greater than 5 and less than 7, the additional records showed his heart had no myocardial damage from the service-connected arteriosclerotic heart disease. He explained that any reduction in METs level or heart function was not related to the service-connected heart condition, but rather to non-service connected causes such as aortic stenosis, status-post open heart surgery, untreated sleep apnea resulting in pulmonary hypertension, and mild restrictive obstructive pulmonary disease. The VA examiner opined that the Veteran’s arteriosclerotic heart disease was without current symptoms or objective signs of morbidity. The Board further finds that the subsequent VA examination, including from March 2019 and an October 2019 medical opinion, relied on for the reduction do not reflect an actual change in the ability to function under the ordinary conditions of life and work. Rather, they, like the September 2016 VA examination, confirm that the new medical evidence shows that the decrease in METs previously presumed to have been due to arteriosclerotic heart disease was actually a reflection of the Veteran’s nonservice-connected disorders. The VA examiners found not so much a change or improvement in arteriosclerotic heart disease or ability to function, but rather that the effects of the disability had previously been incorrectly characterized. Specifically, there has been no actual change in disability. The same severity arteriosclerotic heart disease has been found; symptoms characterized by METs were just now ascribed correctly to non-service-connected disorders. The Board thus finds that the RO reduced the Veteran’s rating without observance of the applicable law. As such, the prior rating is restored. The previously assigned 30 percent rating for arteriosclerotic heart disease is restored, as of March 1, 2018. The Veteran testified that restoration of the 30 percent rating would fulfill his appeal as to this issue. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Lindio 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.