Citation Nr: 21001252 Decision Date: 01/07/21 Archive Date: 01/07/21 DOCKET NO. 13-32 840 DATE: January 7, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected left knee disability prior to May 19, 2015 and 40 percent thereafter is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee disability, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee disability, is remanded. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disability is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active military service from December 1983 to November 1987. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2011 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2017, the Veteran and his fiancée testified before a Board hearing. The transcript of the hearing is of record. By way of background, in a January 2018 Board decision, the Board found that the Veteran presented new and material evidence and as such granted the Veteran’s petition to reopen his claim for entitlement to service connection for a low back disability. The Board remanded the issues on appeal for further evidentiary development. The matter has returned to the Board for appellate consideration. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU has been raised by the record and has been added to the appeal. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453, 54 (2009). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a low back disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee disability, is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee disability, to include as secondary to service-connected left knee disability, is remanded. 3. Entitlement to a rating in excess of 10 percent for service-connected left knee disability prior to May 19, 2015 and 40 percent thereafter is remanded. 4. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. The Board finds that additional development is needed before the Veteran’s claims can be decided, as the Board finds that VA did not substantially comply with the January 2018 Board remand. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). In the August 2017 hearing, the Veteran attested that the doctors at the Chesapeake Spine Center opined that his low back disability is related to his military service and/or secondary to his service-connected left knee disability. As such, in January 2018, the Board remanded the issues to obtain records from The Chesapeake Spine Center. A review of the record shows no attempts were made to obtain these treatment records. As such, the Board finds that a remand is warranted as the Veteran identified pertinent records. The Board also notes that although an attempt was made to obtain records from the Social Security Administration (SSA), no response has been received. As such, the Board finds that a remand is warranted to obtain SSA records. As for the issue of entitlement to a TDIU, during the August 2017 hearing, the Veteran claimed that he was released from his employment due to his service-connected left knee disability. As such, the Board finds that the issue of entitlement to a TDIU has been raised by the record and has been added to the appeal. See Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453, 54 (2009). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. With assistance from the Veteran, obtain records from The Spine Center on Battlefield Boulevard in Chesapeake. 2. Obtain any relevant SSA disability records. 3. Develop the claim for TDIU. 4. Thereafter, readjudicate the claims on appeal, to include the claim for TDIU. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board P. Noh, 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.