Citation Nr: 22010777 Decision Date: 02/24/22 Archive Date: 02/24/22 DOCKET NO. 16-53 759A DATE: February 24, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to special monthly pension benefits, on the basis of countable income, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1974 to January 1975. She died in June 2018 during the pendency of her appeal. The Appellant is her surviving spouse and substitute appellant. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2013 decision which denied eligibility for nonservice-connected pension benefits on the basis of excessive income. In January 2020, the Appellant testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board videoconference hearing. A copy of the transcript is of record. In July 2020 and September 2021, the Board remanded the matter for further development and for the issuance of a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). Entitlement to special monthly pension benefits, on the basis of countable income, is remanded. The Board cannot make a fully-informed decision on the issue of entitlement to special monthly pension benefits at this time. In a June 2013 decision, VA denied nonservice-connected pension benefits on the basis that the Veteran's income exceeded the maximum applicable pension rate (MAPR). In an October 2016 statement of the case (SOC), VA conceded that while the evidence of record showed the Veteran needed the assistance of another person to perform routine activities of daily living, her and her spouse's income together exceeded the MAPR for special monthly pension benefits. In July 2020, the Board found that evidence on the Veteran and her spouse's net worth, income, and medical expenses from April 2011 to June 2018 was missing from the record and remanded the case so that VA could undertake efforts to obtain this information. In February 2021, VA issued a SSOC, which continued to deny pension benefits due to being unable to verify the Veteran's net worth, income, and unreimbursed medical expenses, and returned the case to the Board. In September 2021, the Board found that a remand was required for the issuance of a SSOC which considered the timely submission of evidence pertaining to net worth, income, and unreimbursed medical expenses received after the issuance February 2021 SSOC but prior to recertification to the Board. The Board directed that VA consider this new evidence and readjudicate the Veteran's appeal for special monthly pension benefits on the basis of countable income. In October 2021, VA issued a SSOC which denied special monthly pension on the basis that the evidence failed to show that the Veteran met the requirements for aid and attendance or housebound benefits. Whether a Veteran is entitled to special monthly pension based on the need for aid and attendance is a separate determination from whether a Veteran's income is excessive for VA pension purposes. The Board notes that VA previously conceded that the evidence of record showed the Veteran needed the assistance of another person to perform routine activities of daily living and that the issue perfected to the Board is whether the Veteran and her spouse's income was excessive for VA pension purposes. While the Board directed VA to readjudicate the Veteran's appeal on the basis of countable income, VA failed to consider the evidence received after the February 2021 SSOC or readjudicate the Veteran's appeal for special monthly pension benefits based on countable income. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998) (Board remand confers a right on a claimant to compliance with the remand order). A remand is required. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Readjudicate the Veteran's claim for special monthly pension benefits on the basis of countable income. In a detailed summary, VA must provide a clear accounting and explanation for all derived amounts used in calculating the Veteran and her spouse's net worth, countable income, and unreimbursed medical expenses for each year from 2011 to 2018. (Continued on next page) If the claim remains denied, the Appellant and his representative should be issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC). An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate consideration, if otherwise in order. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Owen, 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.