Citation Nr: 21065820 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 15-27 660 DATE: October 27, 2021 ISSUES 1. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for degenerative joint disease (DJD), right knee. 2. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for DJD, left knee. 3. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 20 percent for intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritic changes (back disability) prior to June 22, 2020, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter. 4. Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability (TDIU). REMANDED Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for DJD, right knee, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for DJD, left knee, is remanded. Entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 20 percent for the back disability prior to June 22, 2020, and in excess of 40 percent thereafter is remanded. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1982 to May 2009. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2009 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Salt Lake City, Utah. Jurisdiction was subsequently transferred to the RO in Houston, Texas. The Veteran testified before an RO Decision Review Officer in November 2013. The Veteran testified in a videoconference hearing in July 2019 before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). Transcripts of both hearings are of record. When this case was most recently before the Board in December 2020, it was remanded for additional evidentiary development. It has since been returned to the Board for further appellate action. The Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to ensure that there is complete the record for appellate review. In this respect, the Board notes that the Veteran submitted an application for a TDIU in September 2021, indicating that his unemployability was at least in part due to his disabilities on appeal. Therefore, the Board has listed the raised TDIU claim as an additional issue on appeal. Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). In his application, he indicated that he received treatment from two VA medical centers from April 2020 to August 2021. However, the electronic claims file shows VA treatment records through June 2020. The Board finds that such indicated VA treatment records could provide crucial information concerning the severity of the Veteran's right knee, left knee, and back disabilities. As such, on remand, the RO should obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA treatment records; and, with appropriate authorization from the Veteran, any additional outstanding private treatment records identified by him as pertinent to his claims, to specifically include any treatment he received from VA from June 2020. Thus, the Board finds that the development and adjudication of the issue remanded herein could also impact the Veteran's eligibility for, and entitlement to, a TDIU. See Tyrues v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 166, 177 (2009) (en banc) (explaining that claims are inextricably intertwined where the adjudication of one claim could have a significant impact on the adjudication of another claim); Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180, 183 (1991). Therefore, the Veteran's claim for a TDIU is inextricably intertwined with the remanded claim, and also requires additional development in terms of obtaining information and evidence. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Complete any evidentiary development necessary to adjudicate a claim for a TDIU, to specifically include requesting, with the Veteran's assistance, all records from his previous employers, including any medical records and/or administrative decisions pertaining to disability benefits. All actions to obtain the requested records should be fully documented in the electronic claims file. If they cannot be located or no such records exist, the Veteran and his attorney should be so notified in writing. 2. Obtain and associate with the claims file any outstanding VA treatment records; and, with appropriate authorization from the Veteran, any additional outstanding private treatment records identified by him as pertinent to his claims, to specifically include any treatment he received from VA from June 2020 as indicated above. The Veteran and his representative are to be notified of any unsuccessful efforts in this regard in order to allow the Veteran the opportunity to obtain and submit any such records for VA review. 3. After completing the requested actions, and any additional notification and/or development deemed warranted, readjudicate the claims on appeal. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, furnish the Veteran and his representative with an appropriate supplemental statement of the case and afford a reasonable opportunity for response. MICHAEL A. PAPPAS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R.M.K., 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.