Citation Nr: 20037591 Decision Date: 06/02/20 Archive Date: 06/02/20 DOCKET NO. 18-11 596 DATE: June 2, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on the need for regular aid and attendance and/or housebound status is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Army from February 1946 to December 1946. Unfortunately, he died in September 2018. His surviving spouse has been substituted as the appellant for purposes of processing his claim to completion. See July 2019 VA notification letter; 38 U.S.C. § 5121A. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Augusta, Maine. This case was previously before the Board in April 2018, when it was remanded to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development. After taking further action, the AOJ confirmed and continued the prior denial and returned the case to the Board. See May 2020 supplemental statement of the case. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, a remand is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the appellant’s claim and to afford her every possible consideration. Entitlement to SMC based on the need for regular aid and attendance and/or housebound status is remanded. When this case was remanded in April 2018, the Board requested, among other things, that the AOJ obtain all outstanding VA treatment records, to specifically include an Examination for Housebound Status or Permanent Need for Regular Aid and Attendance form (VA Form 21-2680) that the Veteran’s VA primary care physician reported having completed in December 2017. In this regard, a December 8, 2017 VA outpatient record showed that the Veteran’s primary care physician completed an aid and attendance/housebound form. In the clinical notes, the VA physician indicated that the Veteran should “easily qualify” for the benefit. On remand, the AOJ obtained additional, outstanding VA treatment records. Nevertheless, a VA Form 21-2680 from December 2017 is not of record. Under governing law, efforts to obtain records in the possession of a Federal department or agency may be discontinued only if it is concluded that the evidence sought does not exist or that further efforts to obtain the evidence would be futile. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(2). Here, it is not clear from the record that efforts to obtain the December 2017 VA Form 21-2680 have reasonably been exhausted. As such, further development is necessary. In January 2020, the AOJ obtained a medical opinion with respect to whether the Veteran was in need of regular aid and attendance, and/or housebound, prior to his death. It is clear from the opinion that he was. What is less clear is whether he was in need of regular aid and attendance and/or housebound solely as a result of his service-connected disabilities, apart from his non-service-connected impairments, and if so, for how long. Those matters need to be clarified.  This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Make specific efforts to obtain a copy of the Examination for Housebound Status or Permanent Need for Regular Aid and Attendance form (VA Form 21-2680) that the Veteran’s VA primary care physician completed in December 2017, to include requesting a copy of the document directly from the Oakwood VA Clinic and, if necessary, from the Veteran’s VA primary care physician (Dr. Streleckis). Efforts to obtain the evidence should be fully documented and should be discontinued only if it is concluded that the evidence sought does not exist or that further efforts to obtain the evidence would be futile. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(2). The evidence obtained, if any, should be associated with the claims file. If the December 2017 VA Form 21-2680 cannot be located, a formal finding to that effect should be made and associated with the record, and the appellant and her representative should be notified. 2. After the foregoing development has been completed to the extent possible, make arrangements to have the VA examiner who previously prepared an opinion in this case in January 2020 review the record and provide a supplemental report. The examiner should be asked to clarify whether it is at least as likely as not (i.e., whether it is 50 percent or more probable) that the Veteran, prior to his death, was in need of regular aid and attendance and/or housebound solely as a result of his service-connected disabilities, apart from his non-service-connected impairments, and if so, to provide a retrospective opinion with regard to approximately how long that was true. If the January 2020 examiner is no longer employed by VA or is otherwise unable to provide the opinion(s) requested, arrange to obtain the requested information from another qualified examiner. A complete rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. 3. After completing the above, and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the action 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 appellant and her representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Ragheb, 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.