Citation Nr: 18150697 Decision Date: 11/15/18 Archive Date: 11/15/18 DOCKET NO. 16-25 030 DATE: November 15, 2018 ORDER Payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care under the Camp Lejeune Family Member Program (CLFMP) pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 17.410 is denied. FINDING OF FACT 1. The appellant did not reside at Camp Lejeune, and was not in utero at Camp Lejeune, for at least 30 days during the period beginning on August 1, 1953 and ending on December 31, 1987. 2. The appellant has not submitted evidence of treatment for a covered illness or disease during the applicable periods related to payment or reimbursement. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care under CLFMP pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 17.410 are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1787, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.400, 17.410.   REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service from January 1979 to April 1983, with service at Camp Lejeune from May 3 to June 22, 1979. The appellant in this case asserts that she was married to the Veteran during his period of service at Camp Lejeune, and has sought benefits under CLFMP; it appears, however, that the appellant and the Veteran are no longer married, although there is not a divorce decree associated with the claims file. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2015 letter of determination by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Financial Services Center (FSC). The appellant seeks payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care as a Camp Lejeune family member under 38 C.F.R. § 17.410. She maintains that she is a qualifying Camp Lejeune family member pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 17.410(b), as she stayed at the “Hostess House” (a hotel or temporary housing) at Camp Lejeune from April to August 1979, as noted in her March 2015 application. The appellant has submitted a marriage license to the Veteran showing that they were married in December 1978. The Board further notes that the appellant has not submitted any records to document that she stayed at “Hostess House” at any time during the Veteran’s 49 days of service at Camp Lejeune. She has, however, submitted an August 2015 letter from the FOIA office at Camp Lejeune that indicated that “records regarding the stay of guests were not retained prior to 1999” and that they were “only maintained for a period of two years and then they [were] destroyed.” The appellant asserted in her August 2015 notice of disagreement that she was not aware of the need to retain receipts from over 30 years ago. Finally, in her April 2016 substantive appeal, the appellant reiterated that she was unable to provide receipts from 37 years ago and that the FOIA office was unable to provide her the information that she sought. She also indicated that at the age of 33 she had a hysterectomy, noting that such constituted female infertility; she also noted that her daughter, who was 6 months old at the time of the hysterectomy, was diagnosed with poly-cystic ovarian cyst syndrome (PCOS), which can also lead to female infertility, when she was a young teenager. Finally, the appellant asserted that the Veteran, her “then husband who served at Camp Lejeune then at Cherry Point,” can also “vouch for the fact that we were there in 1979.” The Board reflects that the appellant has not submitted any statement from the Veteran in support of her claim at this time. In general, VA will provide payment or reimbursement to Camp Lejeune family members for certain non-VA health care provided for covered illnesses and conditions listed under 38 C.F.R. § 17.400(b), which includes female infertility and miscarriage. 38 U.S.C. § 1787; 38 C.F.R. §§ 17.400(b), 17.410. A Camp Lejeune veteran means any veteran who served at Camp Lejeune on active duty for at least 30 days (consecutive or nonconsecutive) during the period beginning on August 1, 1953, and ending on December 31, 1987. 38 C.F.R. § 17.400(b). A Camp Lejeune family member, as relevant to this case, is an individual who resided at Camp Lejeune for at least 30 (consecutive or nonconsecutive) days during the period beginning on August 1, 1953, and ending on December 31, 1987; and is related to a Camp Lejeune veteran by birth. 38 C.F.R. § 17.410(b). In the present case, the Board finds that payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care as a Camp Lejeune family member must be denied. While the Veteran’s personnel record documents that he was stationed at Camp Lejeune for 49 days from May to June 1979 and would be considered a Camp Lejeune Veteran for purposes of treatment under 38 C.F.R. § 17.400, the appellant has not submitted sufficient evidence demonstrating that she ever was present at Camp Lejeune at any time during the Veteran’s period of service. Furthermore, even if the Board were to take the appellant’s statements at face-value and resolve reasonable doubt in her favor, the law in this case requires that she be present at Camp Lejeune for a total of 30 days. The evidence does not demonstrate that the Veteran had any dependents living with him on base at Camp Lejeune during his 49-day assignment to Camp Lejeune in this case. Moreover, although the Board does not doubt that, as a spouse of a Veteran who was stationed at Camp Lejeune during the applicable period in this case, the appellant at least visited the base and stayed at the hotel or temporary housing at some point during that 49-day period of service, she has not asserted nor has she demonstrated that she was present in that temporary housing for at least 30 days during the Veteran’s period of assignment to Camp Lejeune. Merely being a spouse of a servicemember and being present at some point during the service period is not enough to claim entitlement in this case, as the appellant must demonstrate that she also was present for at least 30 days at Camp Lejeune during the applicable period; she has not done so in this case. The Board therefore cannot find that the appellant has initially satisfied the residency requirements in this case such that she can be found to be a Camp Lejeune family member for purposes of payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care in this case. See 38 C.F.R. § 17.410(b)(i). Finally, regardless of the above, the Board reflects that the appellant in this case has not submitted any medical records or otherwise indicated that she is seeking payment or reimbursement for treatment rendered for any of the noted covered illnesses or conditions found in 38 C.F.R. § 17.400(b). Although she indicated that she had a hysterectomy—which the Board notes is arguably not the “same thing” as female infertility under 38 C.F.R. § 17.400(b), but is nevertheless irrelevant in the case at bar—over 36 years ago and that she could provide records, the Board reflects that the appellant’s own statements indicate that procedure occurred many years prior to receipt of her application for benefits—and in any event, prior to March 26, 2013—and therefore she cannot be eligible for payment or reimbursement in this case. See 38 C.F.R. § 17.410(d)(i). Thus, even if the Board were to find that the appellant was a Camp Lejeune family member in this case, there is no benefit that the Board could award in this case, as she has not demonstrated that she has been treated for any of the covered illnesses or conditions during the applicable periods that VA could award payment or reimbursement in this case at this time. The Board will not address any eligibility claim raised on behalf of the appellant’s daughter in this decision, as such is outside the scope of this claim as the daughter is free to bring her own claim for payment or reimbursement if she wishes at any time. Accordingly, the legal authority governing eligibility under 38 U.S.C. § 1787 and 38 C.F.R. § 17.410 as it pertains to payment or reimbursement for non-VA medical care for Camp Lejeune family members is specific and the Board is bound by such authority. Under these circumstances, the claim on appeal must be denied as it is without legal merit. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994). JAMES G. REINHART Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD M. Peters, Counsel