Citation Nr: 21002398 Decision Date: 01/13/21 Archive Date: 01/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-10 222 DATE: January 13, 2021 REMANDED An initial rating higher than 10 percent prior to April 7, 2014, and a rating in excess of 60 percent from April 7, 2014 to April 23, 2018, for coronary artery disease (CAD) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from October 1963 to October 1967. This appeal arises from a July 2013 rating decision, which granted service connection for the Veteran’s CAD and assigned an initial 10 percent rating, effective August 29, 2011. In a January 2016 rating decision, the Veteran’s CAD was increased to 60 percent disabling, effective April 7, 2014. A June 2018 rating decision increased the Veteran’s CAD to 100 percent disabling, effective from April 23, 2018. The Veteran is satisfied with the 100 percent rating for the CAD, such that the Board addresses only the period of the increased rating claim from August 29, 2011 to April 23, 2018. See April 2019 Veteran’s representative’s informal hearing presentation. In May 2019, the Board issued a decision denying the appeal for an increased rating for CAD. On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC) issued a May 2020 Order that vacated the Board’s prior decision, and remanded the matter to the Board. The Court’s Order granted an April 2020 Joint Motion for Remand (JMR) filed by both VA and Appellant (“the Parties”). The appeal has been returned the Board for further adjudication and consideration of entitlement to an increased rating for CAD. 1. An initial rating higher than 10 percent prior to April 7, 2014, and a rating in excess of 60 percent from April 7, 2014 to April 23, 2018, for CAD is remanded. Per the JMR, the Board finds it necessary to remand the case for the following development by the AOJ: (1) obtain any outstanding private treatment records by Dr. N.H., the Veteran’s private treating cardiologist, dated prior to April 23, 2018; (2) specifically request a copy of a May 2017 echocardiogram report by Dr. N.H.; and (3) obtain a retrospective medical opinion on whether the Veteran’s CAD increased in severity beyond 10 percent prior to April 7, 2014, and beyond 60 percent from April 7, 2014 to April 23, 2018. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to provide the names and addresses of any medical provider, VA or private, who has treated the Veteran for cardiac problems. After securing any necessary releases, request any relevant records identified that are not duplicates of those already contained in the claims file, including: (a) Dr. N.H., the Veteran’s private treating cardiologist, dated prior to April 23, 2018; and (b) request a copy of a May 2017 echocardiogram report from Dr. N.H. Obtain outstanding VA treatment records, if any. If any requested records are unavailable, the claims file should be annotated as such and the Veteran and his representative notified of such. 2. Obtain a retrospective medical opinion from the May 2018 VA heart conditions examiner (or if not available, then another appropriate clinician), to determine the severity of the Veteran’s CAD prior to April 23, 2018. After reviewing the record, the examiner should comment whether there was any increasing functional impairment due to his CAD during the staged periods of the appeal: (a) prior to April 7, 2014, and (b) from April 7, 2014 to April 23, 2018. Discuss the effect of the Veteran’s CAD on any occupational functioning and activities of daily living. A complete rationale should be provided for all opinions rendered. C. CRAWFORD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Biswajit Chatterjee, 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.