Citation Nr: 18158075 Decision Date: 12/18/18 Archive Date: 12/14/18 DOCKET NO. 16-13 320 DATE: December 18, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a left knee disability prior to November 13, 2012, and in excess of 10 percent from January 1, 2013 is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND Entitlement to an initial rating in excess of 10 percent for a left knee disability prior to November 13, 2012, and in excess of 10 percent from January 1, 2013 is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) is remanded. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In an interim February 2016 rating decision, the initial rating of the Veteran’s left knee disability was increased to 10 percent, a temporary 100 percent rating was assigned following arthroscopic surgery effective November 13, 2012, and a 10 percent rating was assigned from January 1, 2013. The issue of entitlement to TDIU has been raised by the record; therefore the issues before the Board are as noted on the title page. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). Additional pertinent evidence, including private treatment records and a March 2018 VA examination report, have been added to the record since the February 2016 Statement of the Case (SOC). Such evidence has not been considered by the AOJ in a supplemental statement of the case; however, since the claims are being remanded, there is no prejudice to the Veteran. Regarding the Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for his left knee disability, the February 2016 rating decision noted that the record reflected that Veteran had a total left knee replacement scheduled on September 24, 2013, but record of such surgery was not in the record. The RO indicated to the Veteran that he may be entitled to a temporary 100 percent evaluation if records of the surgery were submitted. In December 2016, the Veteran submitted private hospital records of his September 2013 total left knee replacement. Such records have not been reviewed by the AOJ. Accordingly, on remand, the AOJ should consider and assign appropriate ratings regarding the Veteran’s total left knee replacement pursuant to the appropriated diagnostic codes, including 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a Diagnostic Code 5055, and to consider whether a rating in excess of 10 percent is warranted prior to his September 2013 total left knee replacement. Any additional records regarding treatment of his left knee should also be obtained. Finally, because a decision on the remanded issue of an increased rating for his left knee disability could significantly impact a decision on the claim for TDIU, the issues are inextricably intertwined. A remand of the claim for TDIU is required. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the names and addresses of all medical care providers who treated the Veteran for his left knee disability since April 2012, to include any additional records of his September 2013 total left knee replacement at Florida Hospital in Orlando, Florida. After securing the necessary release, take all appropriate action to obtain these records, including any updated VA treatment since July 2018. 2. Thereafter, and after taking any additional development deemed necessary, to include obtaining an advisory medical opinion to determine the severity of his left knee disability prior to September 2013, the AOJ should assign the appropriate ratings for the Veteran’s service-connected left knee disability, to include appropriate ratings for a total left knee replacement under 38 C.F.R. § 4.71a, Diagnostic Code 5055, and a rating in excess of 10 percent prior to September 24, 2013, if warranted. (Continued on the next page)   3. After the above development, and any additionally indicated development, has been completed, readjudicate the issues on appeal, including the inextricably intertwined claim for TDIU. If the benefit sought is not granted to the Veteran’s satisfaction, send the Veteran a Supplemental Statement of the Case and provide an opportunity to respond. If necessary, return the case to the Board for further appellate review. M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Eric Struening, Associate Counsel