Citation Nr: 21009602 Decision Date: 02/23/21 Archive Date: 02/22/21 DOCKET NO. 18-35 516 DATE: February 23, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1981 to January 1982. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2018 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). By way of background, the Board, in pertinent part, denied the Veteran’s claim for entitlement to a TDIU in July 2019. See July 2019 Remand BVA or CAVC. Thereafter, the Veteran appealed the July 2019 Board decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In April 2020, the Court granted the parties’ Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR), which vacated the portion of the Board’s decision that denied entitlement to a TDIU and remanded the matter for readjudication. Specifically, the parties agreed that a remand was required because the Board did not analyze the Veteran’s claim for entitlement to a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16 in light of pertinent, applicable authority. See April 2020 CAVC Decision. Entitlement to a TDIU is remanded. The Board’s review of the claims file reveals that further action on the claim of entitlement to a TDIU is needed. Initially, the Board notes that the Veteran reported that he received medical treatment from Dr. D. Rhode from October 2015 through March 2017. He also stated that he had been seeing Dr. L. Rach for his service-connected disabilities since August 2018. See September 2018 VA Form 21-8940 Veterans Application for Increased Compensation Based on Unemployability. The Board notes that the evidence of record includes medical records, dated in September and December 2020, and a March 2019 from Dr. Rach, however no other treatment records from the private physician have been associated with the claims file. See October 2020 Medical Treatment Record – Non-Government Facility; December 2020 Medical Treatment Record – Non-Government Facility. In addition, no private treatment records from Dr. Rhode have been associated with the Veteran’s claims file. Thus, the Board finds that a remand is warranted to obtain medical records from the abovementioned private physicians. In addition, the Veteran submitted an April 2019 Social Security Administration (SSA) decision showing that he was found to be disabled as of January 13, 2018. See October 2020 SSA/SSI Letter. The Board notes that VA requested the Veteran’s SSA records in October 2020, however, the file does not contain any of the medical or hearing records associated with the award of SSA benefits. See October 2020 Medical Treatment Records - Furnished by SSA. The Board notes that, where there has been a determination with regard to SSA benefits, the records concerning that decision must be obtained, if relevant. Tetro v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 100, 108-09 (2000); Murincsak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 363, 372 (1992); Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F.3d 1317, 1321 (2010). As the record suggests that the Veteran is in receipt of SSA benefits in relation to the claim on appeal, the Board finds that attempts to obtain and associate with the claims file any relevant outstanding SSA records should be made. Id. at 1323; see also Baker v. West, 11 Vet. App. 163, 169 (1998). Moreover, in October 2020, letters were sent to the Veteran’s previous employers, requesting that they complete and return VA Form 21-4192, Request for Employment Information in Connection with Claim for Disability Benefits. See October 2020 Initial Private 3rd Party Letter, VA Form 21-4192. Thereafter, the RO mailed the Veteran a letter, dated in November 2020, to inform him that requests for copies of treatment records or other evidence had been sent to his former employers. The letter further stated that it was the Veteran’s responsibility to ensure that VA received the requested evidence. See November 2020 Subsequent Development Letter. The Board notes that neither the Veteran nor his former employers have returned completed copies of the aforementioned forms. On remand, the Veteran should be provided another opportunity to submit the forms, as well as any other information in support of his claim for entitlement to a TDIU. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. With any necessary identification of sources by the Veteran, request all VA treatment records not already associated with the file from the Veteran’s VA treatment facilities, and all private treatment records from the Veteran not already associated with the file. Specifically, attempts should be made to obtain records from Dr. L. Rach, dated from August 2018, and Dr. D. Rhode, dated from October 2015 through March 2017. 2. Identify and obtain any outstanding SSA records that are not already associated with the record. If these records are unavailable, a written statement to this effect must also be incorporated into the claims file. 3. Afford the Veteran another opportunity to submit evidence in support of his claim for a TDIU, to include completing VA Form 21-4192, in order to obtain additional information from his former employers. (Continued on the next page)   4. Thereafter, readjudicate the claim on appeal. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board K. Justis, Attorney-Advisor 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.