Citation Nr: 18143899 Decision Date: 10/22/18 Archive Date: 10/22/18 DOCKET NO. 16-23 803 DATE: October 22, 2018 ORDER An effective date prior to July 1, 2014 for the addition of the Veteran’s spouse, M., to his award of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) disability compensation is denied. FINDING OF FACT On June 13, 2014, the Veteran first informed VA of his marriage to M. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an effective date prior to July 1, 2014 for the addition of the Veteran’s spouse, M., to his award of VA disability compensation have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1115, 5110 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.4, 3.204, 3.401 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran, who is the appellant in this case, served on active duty from August 1965 to July 1968, from May 1972 to February 1996, and from January 2004 to January 2006. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2015 decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which added the Veteran’s current spouse, M., to his award of VA disability compensation, effective July 1, 2014. 1. Entitlement to an effective date prior to July 1, 2014 for the addition of the Veteran’s spouse, M., to his award of VA disability compensation. Veterans who have service-connected disabilities rated as 30 percent disabling and higher may be entitled to additional compensation for dependents. 38 U.S.C. § 1115; 38 C.F.R. § 3.4(b)(2). When determining the effective date for an award of additional compensation for dependents, the effective date will be the last of the following dates: (1) the date of claim; (2) the date the dependency arises; (3) effective date of the qualifying disability rating provided evidence of dependency is received within a year of notification of such rating action; or (4) date of commencement of the service member’s award. 38 C.F.R. § 3.401(b). The “date of claim” for additional compensation for a dependent spouse is the date of the Veteran’s marriage, if evidence of the event is received within a year of the event; otherwise, the date notice is received of the dependent’s existence, if evidence is received within a year of notification of such rating action. 38 U.S.C. § 5110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.401. Under 38 U.S.C. § 5101(a), a specific claim must be filed in order for benefits to be paid or furnished to any individual under the laws administered by VA. See also 38 C.F.R. § 3.151(a). The Secretary has authority to prescribe the nature and extent of the proof required in order to establish a right to VA benefits. See 38 U.S.C. § 501. If a claimant’s application for a benefit under the laws administered by the Secretary is incomplete, the Secretary shall notify the claimant and the claimant’s representative, if any, of the information necessary to complete the application. 38 U.S.C. § 5102(b). If information that a claimant and the claimant’s representative, if any, are notified under subsection (b) is necessary to complete an application is not received by the Secretary within one year from the date such notice is sent, no benefit may be paid or furnished by reason of the claimant’s application. 38 U.S.C. § 5102(c). Except as otherwise provided by law, a claimant has the responsibility to present and support a claim for benefits under laws administered by the Secretary. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(a). In Sharp v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 267, 276 (2009), the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court) held that the effective date for additional compensation for dependents shall be the same date as the rating decision giving rise to such entitlement, irrespective of any previous grant of section 1115 benefits, if proof of dependents is submitted within one year of notice of the rating action. While the Court held that there can be “multiple rating decisions that establish entitlement to additional dependency compensation,” the Court still required that proof of dependent status be submitted within one year of notice of rating action. Id. Dependent compensation benefits were ultimately awarded to the appellant in Sharp on the effective date of the applicable rating increase. VA will accept, for purposes of determining entitlement to benefits under laws administered by VA, the statement of a claimant as proof of marriage, dissolution of a marriage, birth of a child, or death of a dependent, provided that the statement contains: the date (month and year) and place of the event; the full name and relationship of the other person to the claimant; and the social security number of the other person. 38 U.S.C. § 5124; 38 C.F.R. § 3.204. Here, the Veteran contends that he is entitled to an effective date prior to July 1, 2014 for additional dependency benefits. He seeks an effective date of June 15, 2000, the date of his marriage to M., for the addition of M. as his dependent to his award of VA disability compensation. As an initial matter, the record indicates that the Veteran has been in receipt of a disability rating in excess of 30 percent disability since March 1, 1996. Therefore, the Veteran was entitled to additional compensation for dependents since prior to his current marriage to M. The Veteran first informed VA on June 13, 2014 of his June 2000 marriage to M., and the RO assigned an effective date of July 1, 2014 for the addition of M. as the Veteran’s dependent to his award of VA disability compensation. The Board has reviewed all relevant evidence and finds no basis under the law to award an effective date earlier than July 1, 2014 for the addition of M. as the Veteran’s dependent to his award of VA disability compensation. There is nothing in the record prior to that date that would serve to inform VA of the Veteran’s marriage to M. As such, the RO has already assigned the earliest possible effective date for the addition of M. as the Veteran’s dependent to his award of VA disability compensation. The Board recognizes the Veteran’s arguments that he should be granted an earlier effective date of June 2000 because he believes he informed his VA medical treatment providers of his marriage to M. prior to July 2014. However, the Board finds that notice to medical treatment providers of the Veteran’s marriage is insufficient to form the basis of a claim for additional VA disability compensation benefits for dependents. The Veteran has also submitted a copy of his 2000 federal income tax return and a DEERS printout as evidence that he informed VA of his marriage to M. prior to July 1, 2014. However, notice to other federal agencies of a marriage does not constitute either notice to VA of the marriage or a claim for additional VA disability benefits for dependents. As explained above, the law does not permit the Board to consider these factors in determining the effective date for the addition of dependents to an award of VA disability compensation. Consequently, there is no legal basis upon which to grant an effective date prior to July 1, 2014, for the addition of M. as the Veteran’s dependent to his award of VA disability compensation. The Board sympathizes with the Veteran regarding the inequities he believes result from not being entitled to those dependents benefits at an earlier time. However, the Board is bound by the law and is without authority to grant benefits on an equitable basis. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 503, 7104 (2012); Burris v. Wilkie, 888 F.3d 1352, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (holding that “§ 503 provides the Secretary with the authority to grant the precise relief that Appellants request here [payment of moneys], and the Secretary has not delegated that authority”). The Board further observes that “no equities, no matter how compelling, can create a right to payment of the United States Treasury which has not been provided for by Congress.” See Smith v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 429, 432-33 (1992), citing Office of Personnel Management v. Richmond, 496 U.S. 414, 426 (1990). The Board is bound by the law governing the assignment of effective dates in its determination in this case. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104(c). LAURA E. COLLINS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Thomas, Associate Counsel