Citation Nr: 20052917
Decision Date: 08/10/20	Archive Date: 08/10/20

DOCKET NO. 17-34 982
DATE: August 10, 2020

REMANDED

Entitlement to a higher level of special monthly compensation (SMC) is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active duty service from January 1991 to December 1994. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2015 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The claim was remanded by the Board in November 2018. 

1. Entitlement to a higher level of SMC is remanded.

The July 2015 rating decision that is the subject of this appeal granted entitlement to SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.350(i), which provides the statutory requirements for payment of SMC at the housebound rate. The Veteran seeks a higher rate of SMC. Remand is needed to schedule the Veteran for a comprehensive eye examination since he was shown to have diabetic retinopathy after the November 2019 VA aid and attendance or housebound examination was conducted pursuant to the Board’s November 2018 remand. 

The supplemental statement of the case also did not address whether the Veteran is entitled to SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(l) or to higher rates that may be available to the Veteran other than 38 U.S.C. §§ 1114(r)(1) and (r)(2).

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

1. Schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the current severity of the diagnosed diabetic retinopathy. The claims file should be reviewed by the examiner. All necessary tests should be performed, and the results reported. The examiner should specifically address whether the Veteran is unable to recognize test letters at 1 foot and when further examination of the eye reveals that perception of objects, hand movements, or counting fingers cannot be accomplished at 3 feet; or has visual acuity 5/200 or less; or has a vision field reduced to 5 degree concentric contraction in both eyes.

2. If the claim remains denied, issue a supplemental statement of the case that considers whether the Veteran is entitled to SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(l) or to higher rates that may be available to the Veteran other than 38 U.S.C. §§ 1114(r)(1) and (r)(2).

 

K. A. BANFIELD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	D. Van Wambeke, 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.