Citation Nr: 21022404 Decision Date: 04/15/21 Archive Date: 04/15/21 DOCKET NO. 15-24 796 DATE: April 15, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to special monthly compensation based on the need for aid and attendance or housebound status is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1976 to May 1979 and from August 1979 to December 1984. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This matter was previously remanded by the Board in September 2020 for an examination and opinion. Unfortunately, a review of the record indicates that there has not been substantial compliance with the previous remand directives and further development is necessary. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). The September 2020 Board remand asked the examiner to specifically determine whether any inability to attend the wants of nature is due to her service-connected abdominal hysterectomy or bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. However, the examiner did not address this and it is unclear from the December 2020 examination if the Veteran is unable to attend to the wants of nature. On remand, the examiner should specifically address if the Veteran is unable to attend to the wants of nature and if so, if any of her service-connected conditions are the cause of such an inability. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Return the claims file to an appropriate VA examiner for an addendum opinion as to whether any inability to attend to the wants of nature is due to the Veteran’s service-connected abdominal hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy. The claims file, including a copy of this Remand, must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. The need for another examination is left to the discretion of the medical professional offering the addendum opinion. The examiner must discuss whether the Veteran has an inability to attend to the wants of nature. In so doing, the examiner must address the medical evidence and lay statements of record including the October 2014 examination where loss of bladder control is discussed. The examiner should also consider any other pertinent evidence of record, as appropriate. All findings should be reported in detail and all opinions must be accompanied by a clear rationale. 2. After completing the above action, to include any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the action taken in the preceding paragraph, the Veteran’s claim should be readjudicated based on the entirety of the evidence. If the claim remains denied, the Veteran and her representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. A. ADAMSON Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Uller, 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.