Citation Nr: 18144005 Decision Date: 10/22/18 Archive Date: 10/22/18 DOCKET NO. 14-41 424 DATE: October 22, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on having a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent plus a separate and distinct disability or disabilities ratable at 60 percent, prior to December 20, 2013, is denied. Entitlement to a total disability rating for compensation based on individual unemployability (TDIU) due to service connected disabilities, beginning January 31, 2012, is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Beginning December 20, 2013, a total rating was assigned for the Veteran’s service connected PTSD; at that time his service connected peripheral neuropathy, involving different anatomical locations or bodily systems was rated cumulatively at 60 percent disabling. 2. The Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for PTSD, which included a claim for TDIU as part and parcel, was received on January 31, 2012. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Prior to December 20, 2013, the criteria for special monthly compensation (SMC) at the housebound rate have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (i) (2017). 2. Beginning January 31, 2012, the criteria for a TDIU have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.340, 3.341, 4.15, 4.16, 4.19 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active military service from March 1964 to March 1966. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from the October 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Cleveland, Ohio. This matter was previously before the Board in June 2018. At that time, the Board remanded the issues on appeal on the basis that they were intertwined with the Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for his service connected acquired psychiatric disorder prior to January 31, 2012. The Veteran’s claim for an increased acquired psychiatric rating was also remanded for the issuance of a Statement of the Case (SOC). In June 2018, a SOC was issued denying the Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for his service connected acquired psychiatric disorder prior to January 31, 2012. I. VA’s Duties to Notify and Assist Pursuant to the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), VA has duties to notify and assist claimants in substantiating a claim for VA benefits. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5100, 5102, 5103, 5103A, 5107, 5126 (West 2014); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.159, 3.326 (2016); see also Pelegrini v. Principi, 18 Vet. App. 112 (2004); Quartuccio v. Principi, 16 Vet. App. 183 (2002); Mayfield v. Nicholson, 444 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Dingess/Hartman v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473 (2006). As for the duty to notify, a VCAA letter was sent to the Veteran in April 2010. As for the duty to assist, the Veteran’s service treatment records and VA medical treatment records have been obtained. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c). The Veteran has not identified, and the record does not otherwise indicate, any additional relevant medical records that have not been obtained and associated with his file. Additionally, VA examinations have been secured in connection with the current claim satisfying VA’s duty to assist with respect to obtaining a VA examination. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4). VA has substantially complied with the notice and assistance requirements and the Veteran is not prejudiced by a decision on his claim at this time. II. Compliance with Prior Board Remands The Board observes that this case was previously remanded by the Board in June 2018. The purpose of this remand was issue a SOC regarding the Veteran’s claim for an increased rating for his service connected PTSD. Upon remand, a SOC was issued in June 2018. The Board therefore finds that there was substantial compliance with the prior remand order, as is discussed more fully below, and the Board may continue with its determination. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). III. Analysis The Board has reviewed all of the evidence in the Veteran’s claims file, with an emphasis on the medical and lay evidence for the issue on appeal. Although the Board has an obligation to provide reasons and bases supporting this decision, there is no need to discuss, in detail, the extensive evidence of record. Indeed, the Federal Circuit has held that the Board must review the entire record, but does not have to discuss each piece of evidence. Gonzalez v. West, 218 F.3d 1378, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2000). Therefore, the Board will summarize the relevant evidence where appropriate, and the Board’s analysis below will focus specifically on what the evidence shows, or fails to show, as to the claim. 1. Entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) prior to December 20, 2013. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to SMC prior to December 20, 2013. VA has a well-established duty to maximize a claimant’s benefits. See Buie v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 242, 250 (2011); AB v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 35, 38 (1993). This duty to maximize benefits requires VA to assess all of a claimant’s disabilities to determine whether any combination of disabilities establishes entitlement to SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114. See Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280, 294 (2008) (finding that SMC “benefits are to be accorded when a Veteran becomes eligible without need for a separate claim”). SMC benefits by reason of being housebound are payable if the Veteran has a single permanent disability rated 100 percent disabling, and has either (1) additional service connected disability or disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent or more, or (2) is “permanently housebound” by reason of service-connected disability or disabilities. 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (i). The disability or disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent or more must be separate and distinct from the 100 percent service connected disability and must involve different anatomical segments or bodily systems. 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (i)(1). The Veteran’s current effective date of the grant of SMC based on housebound status is based upon the total disability rating for the Veteran’s service connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with separate disabilities combining to 60 percent. The Veteran’s service connected PTSD, evaluated as 100 percent, is effective January 31, 2012 and the Veteran’s separate disabilities did not combine to at least 60 percent disabling until December 20, 2013. Thereby, as the evidence of record does not demonstrate that the Veteran had a single service connected disability rated as 100 percent disabling and a sufficient additional disability independently ratable at 60 percent or more disabling to warrant a finding of statutory housebound status prior to December 20, 2013, an earlier effective date for SMC based on housebound status is not warranted. In reaching the above conclusions, the Board has considered the applicability of the benefit of the doubt doctrine. However, as the preponderance of the evidence is against the Veteran’s claim, that doctrine is not applicable in the instant appeal. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b). 2. Entitlement to a TDIU prior to October 17, 2014. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to a TIDU prior to October 17, 2014, the date in which the Veteran filed his claim for a TDIU. Specifically, the Veteran, through his attorney, is seeking an earlier effective date for the Veteran’s award of a TDIU. An effective date will be the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is the later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 (2017). The Board notes that in July 2010, the Regional Office denied the Veteran’s claim of an increased rating for his PTSD. The decision also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability. The Veteran did not appeal that decision, nor was any new and material evidence submitted within the appeal period, and the decision became final. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(c); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1103. In January 2012, the Veteran filed a claim for an increased rating for his PTSD. As discussed above, in May 2018, the Board granted a 100 percent rating for the Veteran’s PTSD, with an effective date of January 31, 2012, the date in which the Veteran’s claim was received. Additionally, in April 2015, the Regional Office (RO) granted entitlement to a TDIU effective October 17, 2014, the day the Veteran submitted his claim for TDIU. (Continued on the next page)   However, the Board finds that the correct effective date for the Veteran’s TDIU would be January 31, 2012, the date in which his claim for an increased rating for his service connected PTSD was received. A date earlier than January 31, 2012, for the grant of TDIU is not warranted as the Veteran’s previously filed claims for increased ratings for his PTSD became final as discussed above. MICHAEL MARTIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Mountford, Associate Counsel