Citation Nr: 21076947 Decision Date: 12/28/21 Archive Date: 12/28/21 DOCKET NO. 18-18 973 DATE: December 28, 2021 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to additional Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E) (formerly known as Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment) services under the provisions of 38 U.S.C. Chapter 31, Title 38 of the United States Code, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran's DD Form 214 shows that he served on active duty in the United States Army from April 1985 to March 1988; it is also indicated that the Veteran served on active duty from May to September 1994. This appeal to before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) arose from a January 2018 administrative decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) that denied Chapter 31 services for additional academic training. The Veteran disagreed with that decision and subsequently perfected an appeal to the Board. The instant matter was then previously before the Board in August 2020, at which time it was remanded for further development. In the August 2020 action, the Board noted that after the Veteran had perfected his appeal, he was declared rehabilitated for VR&E purposes because he had successfully maintained employment for at least 60 days as Peer Support Specialist. However, because it was unclear whether the Veteran was still employed in that field or in some other capacity, the Board found it necessary to remand the matter to clarify the Veteran's employment status. The Board further instructed that if the Veteran indicated that he was still in need of additional training, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) was to arrange for him to be afforded a vocational rehabilitation evaluation, which evaluation was to include determinations as to (1) whether the achievement of employment by the Veteran was reasonably feasible under 38 C.F.R. § 21.53; (2) whether the achievement of the vocational goal as expressed by the Veteran is reasonably feasible under 38 C.F.R. § 21.53; and (3) whether further services are appropriates for purposes of attaining the vocational rehabilitations employment goal as communicate by the Veteran in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 21.94. It was further stated that the evaluation was to specifically address whether the Veteran's aptitudes and abilities are consistent with both his current education and transferrable skills and the degree requirements and skills of any proposed career and educational changes. The matter was then again before the Board in May 2021 at which time it was remanded for the AOJ to ensure compliance with the terms of the August 2020 remand. Specifically, it was noted that following the August 2020 remand, the Veteran had a telephone conversation with a vocational rehabilitation counselor (VRC) but that it was not indicated whether the Veteran was continuing to seek additional training. The Board thus again remanded the matter for the AOJ to determine whether was still employed and, if so, to clarify whether he was still seeking additional training. The Board instructed that if the Veteran indicated that he was still in need of additional training, he was to afforded a vocational rehabilitation evaluation that addressed the questions outlined above. On remand from the Board, the Veteran was scheduled for a telephone conference with a VRC. An October 2021 supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) indicated that the conference was in fact held and that the Veteran expressed his desire for additional training to assist in pursuing a career as a medical assistant. Notably, the record contains no report of the vocational rehabilitation evaluation. Further, the SSOC fails to suggest that a remand-compliant evaluation was conducted, as the SSOC contains no discussion of the above-mentioned factors, nor of the Veteran's aptitudes and abilities. The Board observes that a remand by the Board confers on a Veteran, as a matter of law, a right to compliance with the remand instructions, and imposes upon VA a concomitant duty to ensure compliance with the terms of the remand. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). If the Board proceeds with final disposition of an appeal, and the remand orders have not been complied with, the Board itself errs in failing to ensure compliance. Id. Here, as it does not appear as though the Veteran has been provided with a vocational rehabilitation evaluation that complies with the terms of the Board's August 2020 and May 2021 remand, the Board finds that the matter must again be remanded to ensure that the Veteran is provided with a vocational rehabilitation evaluation that complies with the Board's remand directives. See Stegall, supra. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Arrange for the Veteran to be afforded a vocational rehabilitation evaluation that ascertains the current limitations caused by his service-connected disability and its effect on his ability to obtain and maintain suitable employment. The evaluation should include: (a.) Any clinically indicated medical examinations and testing for the service-connected disability; and (b.) Evaluation by an appropriate vocational rehabilitation counselor to determine: 1. Whether the achievement of employment by the Veteran pursuant to his current education, work experience, and transferable skills is reasonably feasible under 38 C.F.R. § 21.53; and 2. Whether the achievement of the employment goal as expressed by the Veteran is reasonably feasible under 38 C.F.R. § 21.53 ; and 3. Whether further services are appropriate for purposes of attaining the vocational rehabilitation employment goal as communicated by the Veteran in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 21.94. The evaluation should specifically address whether the Veteran's aptitudes and abilities are consistent with both his current education and transferrable skills and the degree requirements and skills of any proposed career and educational changes. (Continued on the next page) The VRC must prepare a written report of the vocational rehabilitation evaluation, which report must contain findings responsive to the requested determinations outlined above. The written report must be associated with the claims file and made available to review by the Board. 2. Review the vocational rehabilitation evaluation report and ensure that it complies with Board's remand directives. If the report is in any deficient, it should be returned to the VRC for corrective action. Then, the issue on appeal should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If any benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran and her representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. K. Conner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Neilson, 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.