Citation Nr: 21064723 Decision Date: 10/21/21 Archive Date: 10/21/21 DOCKET NO. 19-36 143A DATE: October 21, 2021 ORDER Special monthly compensation at the housebound rate under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s) is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran does not have a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent and an additional service-connected disability or disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent. 2. The weight of the evidence is against finding the Veteran's service-connected disabilities cause him to be substantially confined to his dwelling and the immediate premises. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for special monthly compensation at the housebound rate have not been met. 38 U.S.C. 1114(s); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350(i). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from March 1963 to March 1965. 1. Special monthly compensation at the housebound rate Under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s), special monthly compensation is payable at the housebound rate if the veteran has a single service-connected disability rated as 100 percent and either of the following are met: (1) there is 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) he is permanently housebound by reason of service-connected disability or disabilities. 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s); 38 C.F.R. § 3.350(i). The regulation defines permanently housebound as substantial confinement 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 C.F.R. § 3.350(i). The Veteran is service connected for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), hearing loss, tinnitus, and residuals of right elbow bursitis. He receives compensation for total disability based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disability, which is equivalent to a 100 percent rating for purposes of qualifying for special monthly compensation. See Bradley v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 280 (2008). However, assuming the Veteran's TDIU award is based solely on his PTSD, he does not have an additional service-connected disability or disabilities independently ratable at 60 percent, and the evidence does not show that he is permanently housebound by reason of service-connected disability. The evidence does not show that the Veteran is institutionalized or substantially confined to his dwelling or the immediate premises as a result of his PTSD, hearing loss, tinnitus, and/or right elbow disability. VA examinations for the right elbow, hearing loss, and tinnitus do not discuss symptoms or impairment that would render the Veteran confined to his home or the immediate premises. In his Form 9, the Veteran asserted that his PTSD causes him to be housebound, because he rarely leaves the home except for doctors' visits and is fearful of encountering gay people. This statement suggests that while the Veteran avoids people, he is not confined to his home because of PTSD symptoms and could venture out to isolated locations without complications from PTSD. The May 2020 examiner found the Veteran could function in social and occupational environments but would experience reduced reliability and productivity due to his PTSD symptoms such as depressed mood, anxiety, and disturbances of motivation and mood. The examiner did not make a finding that his PTSD would substantially confine him to his home or the immediate premises and instead noted that his loss of function and necessity for a wheelchair were due to his physical illness of muscular dystrophy. (Continued on the next page) The examiner's finding is consistent with the Veteran's statement from his Notice of Disagreement that he is totally disabled because of non-service-connected muscular dystrophy. The April 2018 Disability Benefits Questionnaire (DBQ) submitted by the Veteran discusses physical limitations, including in his upper and lower extremities, but does not identify which ailment causes these limitations or otherwise explain how his service-connected disabilities cause this physical limitation. The DBQ, therefore, holds little probative value for the question of whether his service-connected disabilities substantially confine him. In conclusion, the weight of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran's service-connected disabilities substantially confine him to his dwelling and the immediate premises to warrant special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(s). The Board is grateful for the Veteran's honorable service, and this decision is not meant to detract from that service. However, given the record before it, the Board finds that evidence in this case does not reach the level of equipoise and the claim must be denied. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(a). A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A.P. Armstrong 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.