Citation Nr: 21067788 Decision Date: 11/05/21 Archive Date: 11/05/21 DOCKET NO. 15-17 257 DATE: November 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service-connected disabilities is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service in the United States Marine Corps from April 2004 to November 2012. For his meritorious service, the Veteran was awarded, among other decorations, the Combat Action Ribbon and the Iraq and Afghanistan Campaign Medals. This appeal comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a December 2013 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Board remanded the issue in November 2020 for further development. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. Unfortunately, the Board cannot decide the issue of entitlement to a TDIU without having the Veteran's complete employment history and medical records from the Social Security Administration (SSA). In a February 2019 VA examination, the Veteran reported that following his discharge from service, he attended college and did landscaping work. He recalled that his GPA was a 2.9 when he left school to enter the workforce. He reported that he currently worked as a military advisor in a contracted role at Fort Bragg. He described his current work performance as excellent. In a May 2020 private employment assessment, the Veteran stated that he worked odd jobs painting and landscaping. In June 2021, the Veteran submitted a VA Form 21-8940 Veterans Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. However, the Veteran did not fully disclose his employment history after he separated from service. A remand is warranted to give the Veteran another opportunity to fully disclose all work history after he separated from service. Additionally, in a June 2021 brief, the Veteran's attorney noted that according to the Veteran's Social Security record, the Veteran had not worked since November 29, 2012. However, the Veteran's SSA files are not of record. Therefore, on remand, the RO should obtain the Veteran's SSA medical records and earnings statements. Finally, because the Veteran (through his attorney) only recently submitted his formal application for a TDIU, the RO has been in the process of developing evidence related to that application. This evidence has not been reviewed in a statement of the case or a supplemental statement of the case, and the Board is not permitted to view this relevant evidence in the first instance. Notably, the Board remanded this claim in November 2020. At that time, the Veteran was represented by the same attorney who currently represents him. The November 2020 Board remand specified the need for filing a formal claim for a TDIU. Neither the Veteran nor his attorney submitted any requested documents before the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case in January 2021. After this case was certified to the Board, the Veteran's attorney then requested an extension of time, and only submitted the requested documents in September 2021, some 10 months after the Board's remand. Quite simply, this remand is required in large part because of the delay in action from the Veteran's attorney. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's SSA medical records and SSA earnings statements from November 2012 to present. 2. Request the Veteran to complete and return a VA Form 21-8940 Veterans Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. On the application, the Veteran MUST identify ALL employment after his separation from service, including work painting and landscaping (and other odd jobs) and work as a contracted military advisor at Fort Bragg. Once employment has been identified a VA Form 21-4192, Request for Employment Information, should also be completed and returned. Evan M. Deichert Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Crawford, 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.