Citation Nr: 21001485 Decision Date: 01/08/21 Archive Date: 01/08/21 DOCKET NO. 16-54 585 DATE: January 8, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an increased initial rating for coronary artery disease (CAD) status post myocardial infarction with stenting post percutaneous intervention (PCI), rated at 10 percent from June 28, 2011, at 30 percent from July 25, 2014, and at 60 percent from December 10, 2014 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably on active duty in the United States Air Force from February 1964 to February 1968. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded (among other decorations) the Vietnam Campaign Medal and Vietnam Service Medal. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Previously, the RO had granted the Veteran’s claim for service connection for CAD in a December 2013 rating decision, with notice of that decision provided in January 2014. Within a year of that rating decision, in January 2015, the Veteran asked for reconsideration of his rating or, in the alternative, for his letter to be considered a notice of disagreement. This letter then led to the March 2015 rating decision on appeal. Considering this history, the Board finds that the earlier December 2013 rating decision that granted service connection for the Veteran’s CAD never went final. As a result, the Board considers this an initial rating claim, and will consider the entire period on appeal. In November 2020, the Veteran testified at a virtual Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing has been associated with the claims file. At that hearing, the Veteran and his representative were clear that they did not wish to waive Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ or RO) review of and evidence submitted after the supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). Further, since his hearing, the Veteran has submitted additional evidence, including private medical records and contentions regarding further care at VA medical facilities. Because the Veteran did not waive AOJ review over evidence submitted or obtained since the previous adjudication, the Board must remand the claim to the AOJ for consideration of this evidence consistent with the Veteran’s wishes. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. With any necessary assistance from the Veteran, obtain any outstanding private treatment records regarding his service-connected CAD. 2. Obtain the Veteran’s VA treatment records dated from September 2020 and thereafter and associate them with his claims file. 3. Following the completion of the above ordered development, readjudicate the claim with consideration of all evidence, including the newly submitted evidence and hearing testimony. If the benefits sought are not granted, furnish the Veteran and his representative a SSOC. The Veteran and his representative must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Mouzakis, 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.