My claim was filed in Feb, 2014 and awarded in July, 2015. I am 100% schedular for back disability. I was awarded SMC-S during rehab (additional 100% ratings after surgery) for 2 hip replacement surgeries (in fall of 2004 & spring of 2005), secondary to the 100% schedular rating. The rehabs overlapped and SMC-S was awarded for total of 17 months (100% plus additional 60%). After the 17 months for rehab, I was awarded 30% for each hip for a total of 60% additional. The SMC-S was retro for the 17 months during 2004-2006, then they took it away after the 17 months in May, 2006. Shouldn't the SMC-S have continued based on the two 30% hip awards ((if added = 60%; if combined = 60% with bilateral factor (30% + 30% combines to 51%, plus 5.1% bilateral = 56.1% rounded to 60%)). This should qualify to continue on with SMC-S beyond May, 2006 when VA removed it.
Am I correct?
Need help understanding, thanks !!
(this post was re-worded from previous post under different title)
Question
HitemStraight
My claim was filed in Feb, 2014 and awarded in July, 2015. I am 100% schedular for back disability. I was awarded SMC-S during rehab (additional 100% ratings after surgery) for 2 hip replacement surgeries (in fall of 2004 & spring of 2005), secondary to the 100% schedular rating. The rehabs overlapped and SMC-S was awarded for total of 17 months (100% plus additional 60%). After the 17 months for rehab, I was awarded 30% for each hip for a total of 60% additional. The SMC-S was retro for the 17 months during 2004-2006, then they took it away after the 17 months in May, 2006. Shouldn't the SMC-S have continued based on the two 30% hip awards ((if added = 60%; if combined = 60% with bilateral factor (30% + 30% combines to 51%, plus 5.1% bilateral = 56.1% rounded to 60%)). This should qualify to continue on with SMC-S beyond May, 2006 when VA removed it.
Am I correct?
Need help understanding, thanks !!
(this post was re-worded from previous post under different title)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Top Posters For This Question
12
12
10
2
Popular Days
Aug 14
25
Aug 13
9
Aug 15
5
Top Posters For This Question
Berta 12 posts
HitemStraight 12 posts
broncovet 10 posts
FormerMember 2 posts
Popular Days
Aug 14 2015
25 posts
Aug 13 2015
9 posts
Aug 15 2015
5 posts
Popular Posts
Berta
SO0RRYSORRY FOR DOUBLES Sorry for doubles, it is in the part where I cite 38 USC 1114, and then remind them of the fact that SMC is an inferred issue when the evidence warrants it, and then (there was
Posted Images
38 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now