Citation Nr: 21024798 Decision Date: 04/26/21 Archive Date: 04/26/21 DOCKET NO. 17-28 449A DATE: April 26, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for aortic stenosis is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from November 1950 to November 1952. This matter comes before the Board from an October 2016 rating decision. The Veteran died in June 2017. A request for substitution was approved in September 2017. The Appellant appeared before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board hearing in September 2019. The transcript is in the record. The Board remanded the issue in January 2020. 1. Entitlement to service connection for aortic stenosis is remanded. Service treatment records, which are mostly missing, note a history of high blood pressure, dizziness and fainting spells, and frequent headaches prior to service entrance. Problems with hypertension were also noted at service discharge. While he was in the military, the Veteran recalled being told that he had an enlarged heart. He said he was diagnosed with heart arrhythmia and palpitations in the service. It is the Appellant’s contention that military service aggravated the cardiovascular issues noted on entrance. The Board remand requested an opinion on this contention. An opinion was obtained in March 2020. The VA examiner indicated that there were no private medical records for review. However, it was also noted that the available VA treatment records showed that the Veteran had received care from Drs. Brittain and Hurlbert. These records have not been obtained by VA, nor is there an indication that attempts have been made. Such necessitates a remand to attempt to obtain these records and have them reviewed by at VA examiner. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Appellant to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for Dr. S. Brittain. and Dr. Hurlbert. Make two requests for the authorized records from each physician unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 2. If records are obtained, obtain an addendum medical opinion. The examiner should be asked if the opinions expressed in March 2020 have changed in light of any newly received treatment records. MICHAEL A. HERMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Rekowski 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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.