Citation Nr: 1320282 Decision Date: 06/24/13 Archive Date: 07/02/13 DOCKET NO. 11-24 674 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Manila, the Republic of the Philippines THE ISSUE Legal entitlement for one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Catherine Cykowski, Counsel INTRODUCTION This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2010 determination by the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Manila, the Republic of the Philippines. Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012). 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002). FINDING OF FACT In January 2010, July 2011 and March 2013, the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) certified that the appellant had no service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas in the service of the Armed Forces of the United States. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund have not been met. 38 U.S.C.A. § 501(a) (West 2002 & West Supp. 2012); American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Pub. L. No. 111-5 (enacted February 17, 2009); 38 C.F.R. § 3.203 (2012). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veterans Claims Assistance Act of 2000, codified in pertinent part at 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5103, 5103A (West 2002), and the pertinent implementing regulation, codified at 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (2012), provide that VA will assist a claimant in obtaining evidence necessary to substantiate a claim but is not required to provide assistance to a claimant if there is no reasonable possibility that such assistance would aid in substantiating the claim. As part of the notice, VA is to specifically inform the claimant and the claimant's representative of which portion, if any, of the evidence is to be provided by the claimant and which part, if any, VA will attempt to obtain on behalf of the claimant. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) has held that when the interpretation of a statute is dispositive of the issue on appeal, neither the duty to assist nor the duty to notify provisions of the VCAA are implicated. Dela Cruz v. Principi, 15 Vet. App. 143, 149 (2001); Smith v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 227, 231- 32 (2000). In this case, the law is dispositive, and basic legal entitlement to the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund eligibility is precluded based upon the Veteran's lack of qualified service; therefore, legal entitlement to the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund must be denied. Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426 (1994). Analysis of Claim Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a one-time benefit is provided for certain Philippine veterans to be paid from the "Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund." American Recovery and Reinvestment Act § 1002, Pub. L. No. 111-5 (enacted February 17, 2009). Payments for eligible persons will be either in the amount of $9,000 for non-United States citizens, or $15,000 for United States citizens. For eligible persons who accept a payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund, such payment "shall constitute a complete release of any claim against the United States by reason of [such] service ...." However, nothing in this act "prohibit[s] a person from receiving any benefit (including health care, survivor, or burial benefits) which the person would have been eligible to receive based on laws in effect as of the day before the date of the enactment of this Act." Section 1002 addresses Payments to Eligible Persons Who Served in the United States Armed Forces in the Far East During World War II. Section 1002 (c)(1) provides that the Secretary may make a payment from the compensation fund to an eligible person who, during the one-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, submits to the Secretary a claim for benefits under this section. The application for the claim shall contain such information and evidence as the Secretary may require. Section 1002 (c)(2) provides that if an eligible person who has filed a claim for benefits under this section dies before payment is made under this section, the payment under this section shall be made instead to the surviving spouse, if any, of the eligible person. Section 1002 (d) provides that an eligible person is any person who--(1) served--(A) before July 1, 1946, in the organized military forces of the Government of the Commonwealth of the Philippines, while such forces were in the service of the Armed Forces of the United States pursuant to the military order of the President dated July 26, 1941, including among such military forces organized guerrilla forces under commanders appointed, designated, or subsequently recognized by the Commander in Chief, Southwest Pacific Area, or other competent authority in the Army of the United States; or (B) in the Philippine Scouts under section 14 of the Armed Forces Voluntary Recruitment Act of 1945 (59 Stat. 538); and (2) was discharged or released from service described in paragraph (1) under conditions other than dishonorable. The appellant asserts that she had recognized guerilla service from July 1943 to March 1946. In support of her claim, the appellant submitted a certificate of discharge from the Philippine Army, an application for old age pension submitted to the Philippine Veterans Affairs Office, copies of identification cards from the Veterans Federation of the Philippines, a certification from the Armed Forces of the Philippines, dated in November 1972, and affidavits from individuals who served with her in the Philippine Army and attesting to the claimed guerilla service. The appellant did not submit a DD Form 214, a Certification of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, or an original Certificate of Discharge in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.203(a)(1). The documents submitted by the appellant do not satisfy the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.203 as acceptable proof of service, as they are not official documents of the appropriate United States service department. As such, the documents submitted by the appellant may not be accepted as verification of service for the purpose of determining eligibility for VA benefits, including the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund. In January 2010, the NPRC certified that the appellant did not have service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. In July 2011 and March 2013, the NPRC reviewed documents submitted by the appellant and determined that the evidence did not warrant a change in the prior certifications. The NPRC has certified that the appellant had no qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerrillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. This verification is binding on VA such that VA has no authority to change or amend the finding. Duro v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 530, 532 (1992). The proper course for any claimant, who believes there is a reason to dispute the report of the service department or the content of military records is to pursue such disagreement with the service department. See Sarmiento v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 80, 85 (1994). Recognition of service by the Philippine Government, although sufficient for entitlement to benefits from that Government, is not sufficient for benefits administered by VA. This department is bound to follow the certifications by the service departments with jurisdiction over United States military records. Based upon the record in this case, the appellant had no qualifying service as a member of the Philippine Commonwealth Army, including the recognized guerillas, in the service of the United States Armed Forces. Therefore, as the appellant had no qualifying service, the basic eligibility criteria for establishing entitlement to a one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund are not met, and the claim must be denied. ORDER Legal entitlement to the one-time payment from the Filipino Veterans Equity Compensation Fund is denied. ____________________________________________ K. J. ALIBRANDO Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Department of Veterans Affairs