Citation Nr: 21009366 Decision Date: 02/22/21 Archive Date: 02/22/21 DOCKET NO. 10-20 383 DATE: February 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for chondromalacia of the left knee with degenerative changes and genu varum (now characterized as based on limitation of extension) prior to November 6, 2020, is remanded. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for chondromalacia of the left knee with degenerative changes and genu varum based on limitation of extension on or after November 6, 2020, is remanded. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for chondromalacia of the left knee with degenerative changes and genu varum based on limitation of flexion on or after November 6, 2020, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1974 to July 1977. This case originally came before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from February 2009 and March 2009 rating decisions by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). A hearing was held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in April 2016. A transcript of the hearing is of record. The undersigned Veterans Law Judge held the record open for a 60-day period following the hearing to allow for the submission of additional evidence, and the Veteran submitted additional evidence thereafter. The Veteran opted not to have a second hearing in a November 2018 telephone call with the Board, and he has not since requested another hearing. The testimony from his April 2016 Board hearing will be considered in making a final determination for the appeal. In August 2016 and September 2018 decisions, the Board addressed other claims that were on appeal and remanded the above claim for further development. The remaining history of the appeal up until that time is detailed in the more recent of those decisions. The case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review. In a January 2021 rating decision, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) granted increased evaluations based on flexion and extension, recharacterizing the left knee disability to include genu varum based on a November 2020 claim, as reflected above. The Board notes that it fulfilled the Veteran’s most recent Privacy Act request in a February 2021 written response. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 1.577 and 20.1200. On review, the case must be remanded to the AOJ for review and issuance of a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) because relevant private treatment records were added to the claims file prior to the case being transferred to the Board. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.31, 19.37. The AOJ will also have an opportunity to consider the potential applicability of its decision as to the separate left knee evaluations for the portion of the appeal period prior to the November 2020 claim. The case is REMANDED for the following action: The case should be reviewed by the AOJ on the basis of additional evidence since the April 2020 SSOC. If the benefits sought are not granted, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished an SSOC and be afforded an opportunity to respond before the record is returned to the Board for further review. J.W. ZISSIMOS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Postek, 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.