Citation Nr: 21028438 Decision Date: 05/11/21 Archive Date: 05/11/21 DOCKET NO. 16-62 448 DATE: May 11, 2021 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) based on housebound status from April 13, 2012 to June 11, 2014 is remanded. The issue of entitlement to SMC based on housebound status from January 2, 2015 is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) from April 13, 2012 to July 31, 2015 is remanded. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU from October 3, 2017 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1983 to June 2007. This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from multiple RO rating decisions. The issue of entitlement to TDIU arose as part of an appeal of the increased rating assigned for the Veteran's bilateral knees pursuant to Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447 (2009). The Board recognized that TDIU was on appeal in its January 2019 decision and found that the proper effective date for the Veteran's bilateral knee ratings was April 13, 2012. Therefore, the appeal period for entitlement to TDIU begins on April 13, 2012, the date VA received the Veteran's claim of increased rating for bilateral knees. In the January 2019 decision, the Board granted TDIU from August 1, 2015 to October 3, 2017 only. Therefore, the appeal period before the Board is outlined on the title page. The Veteran's appeal was originally before the Board in January 2019. In that decision the Board granted a TDIU from August 1, 2015 to October 3, 2017 only and determined that SMC based on the housebound rate did not apply. The Veteran appealed the Board's decision to the United States Court of Veterans Claims (Court). In December 2020, the Court granted a joint motion for partial remand (JMPR) which vacated the January 2019 Board decision regarding the issue of entitlement to SMC at the housebound rate. Court specifically noted the JMPR was limited to the Board's decision for consideration of SMC under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s). The Court then noted the Board erred by only considering entitlement to a TDIU from August 1, 2015 to October 3, 2017, and by only addressing whether the Veteran's service-connected disabilities combined to cause unemployability without addressing whether he has a single service-connected disability that would substantiate the award of TDIU benefits. On remand, the Court noted the Board must address (1) whether the Veteran could have established entitlement to a TDIU prior to August 1, 2015 and/or after October 2, 2017, and (2) whether the grant of TDIU for any time period (including the already granted time period of August 1, 2015 to October 2, 2017) could be based on a single disability. 1. The issue of entitlement to SMC based on housebound status from April 13, 2012 to June 11, 2014 is remanded. 2. The issue of entitlement to SMC based on housebound status from January 2, 2015 is remanded. 3. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU from April 13, 2012 to July 31, 2015 is remanded. 4. The issue of entitlement to a TDIU from October 3, 2017 is remanded. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. BACKGROUND FOR THE RO ADJUDICATOR: The Board notes a previous Appeals Modernization Act (AMA) decision has been issued for this Veteran regarding increased rating claims for service-connected residuals of a stroke and SMC based on housebound status that will directly affect the issues in this remand. Additionally, in the AMA decision the Board has requested development for Social Security Administration (SSA) records that are relevant to the remanded claims. As such, the Board will defer adjudication of the claims of entitlement to a TDIU and SMC based on housebound status until the development directed in the AMA decision are completed. The appropriate remedy where a pending claim is inextricably intertwined with a claim currently on appeal is to remand the claim on appeal pending the adjudication of the inextricably intertwined claim. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991). 2. After development is conducted according to the AMA decision, adjudicate the issue of entitlement to a TDIU, to include determining whether the issue of entitlement to a TDIU is moot for any period of time during which the Veteran is receiving a 100 percent rating and whether the Veteran's service-connected stroke residuals when considered individually or as a whole are the product of a single disability that renders him unemployable under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16. 3. Readjudicate the issues on appeal. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his attorney should be provided a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). An appropriate period should be allowed for response before the case is returned to the Board. Vito A. Clementi Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board K. McDuffie, 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.