Citation Nr: A25035280 Decision Date: 04/16/25 Archive Date: 04/16/25 DOCKET NO. 250205-506112 DATE: April 16, 2025 ORDER An effective date of January 19, 2021, for entitlement to special monthly compensation (SMC) pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s)(1) is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. In a November 26, 2024, rating decision, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) awarded entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) based solely on the Veteran's service-connected coronary artery disease and valvular heart disease with cardiomyopathy. 2. The Veteran is in receipt of service-connected disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent or more as of January 19, 2021. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an earlier effective date of January 19, 2021, for the award of SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s)(1) are met. 38 U.S.C. § 5110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (c). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from February 1964 to July 1967. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a rating decision issued on November 18, 2024 by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office, herein referred to as the AOJ, under the modernized appeals system known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA). In February 2025, the Veteran submitted a timely Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement) (VA Form 10182) and elected the direct review docket. Based on the Veteran's election, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the November 2024 rating decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. In February 2025, the Veteran waived any additional time within which to modify the Board review docket. See Williams v. McDonough, 37 Vet. App. 305 (2024). Therefore, there is no prejudice to him in proceeding with the adjudication of the claim. Entitlement to SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s)(1) prior to October 1, 2022. Where a veteran has a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent and (1) has additional service-connected disability or disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent, separate and distinct from the 100 percent service-connected disability and involving different anatomical segments or bodily systems, or (2) is permanently housebound by reason of service-connected disability or disabilities. This requirement is met when the veteran is substantially confined as a direct result of service-connected disabilities to his or her dwelling and the immediate premises or, if institutionalized, to the ward or clinical areas and it is reasonably certain that the disability or disabilities and resultant confinement will continue throughout his or her lifetime. 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (i). Subsection 1114(s) requires that a disabled veteran whose disability level is determined by the rating schedule must have at least one disability that is rated at 100 percent in order to qualify for the SMC provided by such statute. Under the law, subsection 1114(s) benefits are not available to a veteran whose 100 percent disability rating is based on multiple disabilities, none of which is rated at 100 percent disabling. For SMC purposes, a TDIU satisfies the requirement of a "service-connected disability rated as total." See Buie v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 242, 251 (2011); Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280, 293 (2008). Therefore, the issue of entitlement to a TDIU based on a single disability is still a viable avenue of meeting the requirements for SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s). Under the AMA, the Board is bound by favorable findings made by the AOJ. 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). The Veteran contends that he is entitled to SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114 (s) as of January 19, 2021, the date he meets the schedular criteria. Here, the Board notes that in the rating decision issued on November 26, 2024, the AOJ determined that the Veteran was unemployable as a result of his service-connected coronary artery and valvular heart disease with cardiomyopathy and awarded a TDIU as of July 21, 2014, the date service connection for such disability was awarded. Based on such award, the Veteran has a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent disabling for the purposes of SMC. See Buie, supra; Bradley, supra; 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). Moreover, in the rating decision issued on November 18, 2024, the AOJ determined that the Veteran's additional service-connected disabilities of atrial fibrillation flutter (10 percent, effective March 15, 2019); diabetes mellitus, type II (DMII) (20 percent, effective August 28, 2006); separate ratings for peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities affecting the sciatic and femoral nerves, associated with DMII (each evaluated as 10 percent, effective January 19, 2021); residuals of infected abscess of the left elbow (noncompensable, effective July 21, 1967); scars associated with coronary artery and valvular heart disease (noncompensable, effective January 3, 2012); and hypertension (noncompensable, effective August 10, 2022) are independently ratable at 60 percent or more as of October 1, 2022. 38 C.F.R. § 3.104(c). However, the Board notes that such disabilities result in a combined disability rating of 60 percent as of January 19, 2021, the date of service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral lower extremities. Consequently, the Veteran is in receipt of a TDIU based on a single service-connected disability and additional service-connected disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent, separate and distinct from the 100 percent service-connected disability, as of January 19, 2021. Therefore, an earlier effective date of January 19, 2021, for the award of SMC pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) is warranted. Wendy Daknis Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Waite, Jennifer 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.