Citation Nr: 21027010 Decision Date: 05/04/21 Archive Date: 05/04/21 DOCKET NO. 18-03 233 DATE: May 4, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to reinstatement of Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) benefits under the provisions of Chapter 31, Title 38, United States Code is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from June 2005 to November 2005 and from September 2007 to October 2008. These matters are before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of August 2017 determinations by the Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment Division of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. In February 2021, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. Entitlement to reinstatement of VR&E benefits under the provisions of Chapter 31, Title 38, United States Code is remanded. The Veteran has previously been found entitled to VR&E benefits with a serious employment handicap. See April 2017 Counseling Record-Narrative Report. Subsequently, the Veteran agreed to and signed an Individualized Written Rehabilitation Plan (IWRP)/ Individualized Employment Assistance (IEAP) Rapid Access to Employment plan in May 2017. In June 2017 emails, however, he stated he no longer wanted to pursue VR&E services, primarily because he felt offended by his counselors. As such, the claim was interrupted, and subsequently discontinued on July 12, 2017. However, in a July 31, 2017 email, the Veteran stated that he would like his VR&E services reinstated and wants to take advantage of the program. The Board notes that under 38 C.F.R. § 21.198(c), restoration of the veteran's case to the same status from which the veteran was discontinued, or a different one, requires that VA must first find: (1) The reason for the discontinuance has been removed; and (2) VA has redetermined his or her eligibility and entitlement under Chapter 31. In this case, while the Veteran has indicated he now wants to pursue a VR&E program, no action has been taken relevant to determining the Veteran's current eligibility and entitlement status consistent with the laws and regulations governing the termination of discontinued status. See 38 C.F.R. § 21.198(c)(2). As such, an appropriate assessment by a vocational rehabilitation counselor must be conducted prior to any adjudication of this matter by the Board. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Arrange for the Veteran to be afforded a vocational rehabilitation evaluation and a functional capacity evaluation by a vocational rehabilitation counselor or counseling psychologist to determine the Veteran's eligibility and entitlement under Chapter 31. Specifically, the evaluations should ascertain the current limitations caused by his disabilities and their effect on his ability to obtain or maintain employment consistent with his abilities, aptitude, and interests. It is noted that the Veteran is service-connected for posttraumatic stress disorder, rated as 50 percent disabling; narrowing of the lumbar spine with disc disease L5-S1 with osteoarthritis at L3-S1, rated as 10 percent disabling; and radiculopathy with peripheral neuropathy of the right and left lower extremities, each rated as 10 percent disabling. The evaluations must include a determination as to whether the Veteran has an employment handicap and a severe employment handicap and whether the rehabilitation program proposed by the Veteran (whether the same or revised) is suitable to his abilities, aptitudes, and interests. In doing so, the selected vocational rehabilitation counselor or counseling psychologist must take into account the prior vocational rehabilitation report in April 2017, as well as the January 2017 letter from the Veteran's psychologist. A thorough rationale for all opinions afforded, considering all of the evidence of record, would be of significant assistance to the Board. 2. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the preceding paragraphs, the issue on appeal should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the benefit sought remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Kettler, Associate 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.