Citation Nr: 18139875 Decision Date: 10/01/18 Archive Date: 10/01/18 DOCKET NO. 15-34 593 DATE: October 1, 2018 ORDER The claim of entitlement to burial benefits is denied. FINDING OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s total funeral and cremation expenses of $2,069.44 were paid by Stonebridge Life Insurance Company. 2. The appellant’s personal funds were not used to pay the Veteran’s funeral and cremation expenses. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for payment of burial benefits are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 2302, 2303; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1700-3.1713. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1960 to October 1961. He died in June 2015. The appellant was his fiancé. This appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) arose from an August 2015 decision in which the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Paul, Minnesota denied entitlement to burial benefits. The appellant filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) in August 2015. The RO issued a statement of the case (SOC) in September 2015, and the appellant filed a substantive appeal (via a VA Form 9, Appeal to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals) later that month. The appellant asserts her entitlement to burial benefits to recoup expenses related to the Veteran’s funeral and cremation. Effective July 7, 2014, VA amended its regulations governing entitlement to monetary burial benefits, which included burial allowances for service-connected and non-service-connected deaths, a plot or interment allowance, and reimbursement of transportation expenses. Specifically, VA removed the existing regulations (38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1600 through 3.1612) and replaced them with new regulations renumbered as 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1700 through 3.1713. See 79 Fed. Reg. 32,653-32,662 (June 6, 2014) (codified at 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1700 through 3.1713). The final rule is applicable to claims for burial benefits pending on or after July 7, 2014. (The appellant’s claim for burial benefits has been pending since August 2015, i.e., following the effective date of the rule change on July 7, 2014). Generally, when a regulation changes during the pendency of a claim, VA may consider both the new and old provisions, with due consideration to the effective date of the changes, and apply the most favorable criteria (subject to effective date rules). However, the provisions potentially applicable to the facts of this case have undergone no substantive changes. Both versions are equally favorable. The Board will principally cite the new regulations, in effect at the time the appellant’s claim was filed in August 2015. It is noted, at the outset, that claims for a burial allowance may be advanced only by “[t]he individual whose personal funds were used to pay burial, funeral, and transportation expenses.” at 38 C.F.R. § 3.1702(b)(3). Here, the appellant has asserted that she incurred costs related to the Veteran’s funeral and cremation. However, she provided a bill from Daniels Chapel of Roses that totals $2,069.44. That bill specifies that it was paid by Stonebridge Life Insurance Company in full. Further, the funeral home provided a receipt showing that Stonebridge Life Insurance Company paid the entirety of the bill. While the appellant asserts that she paid the Veteran’s funeral and cremation costs, she has offered no evidence of such payments. Indeed, the evidence unequivocally shows that the Veteran’s funeral and cremation costs were paid in full by an insurance company, not the appellant. As the appellant’s personal funds were not used to pay the Veteran’s funeral or cremation expenses, the claim must be denied. The Board is sympathetic to the appellant and acknowledges that the Veteran had honorable service. However, the legal authority pertaining to burial benefits is prescribed by Congress and implemented via regulations enacted by VA, and neither the agency of original jurisdiction nor the Board is free to disregard laws and regulations enacted for the administration of VA programs. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104(c); 38 C.F.R. § 20.101(a). In other words, the Board is bound by the governing legal authority, and is without authority to grant benefits on an equitable basis. As, on these facts, there is no legal basis to award burial benefits, the appellant’s claim must be denied as a matter of law. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994). JACQUELINE E. MONROE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Michael Sanford, Counsel