Citation Nr: 19136102 Decision Date: 05/09/19 Archive Date: 05/09/19 DOCKET NO. 17-67 787 DATE: May 9, 2019 ORDER Entitlement to Dependents Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits after January [Redacted], 2012 is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran was awarded eligibility for dependents educational assistance in November 2016, effective, May 20, 2003. 2. The appellant was 18 years of age on January [Redacted], 2004 and 26 years of age on January [Redacted], 2012. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to DEA benefit after January [Redacted], 2012 have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 503, 511, 512(a), 3500, 3501, 3512, 5113, 7104 (West 2014); 38 C.F.R. §§ 2.7 (c), 3.159, 21.3020, 21.3021, 21.3040, 21.3041, 21.3046, 21.4131 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION Entitlement to DEA benefits after January [Redacted], 2012. The appellant is seeking entitlement to DEA benefits after January [Redacted], 2012. For the reasons explained below the Board finds the appellant is not entitled to DEA benefits after January [Redacted], 2012. In a November 2016 rating decision, the Veteran was awarded a permanent and total (P&T) rating, as well as eligibility for Dependents’ Educational Assistance (DEA), effective May 20, 2003. Notice was mailed to the Veteran in March 2017. This letter included an explanation that the Veteran’s dependents may be eligible for DEA benefits. The appellant’s basic eligibility for DEA benefits has been established and is not at issue. The appellant filed a March 2017 claim seeking DEA benefits for a course of study beginning August 2017. The appellant’s claim was denied in April 2017 because her delimitating date was January [Redacted], 2012, and as such she was not entitled to benefits after that date. The Board finds that the appellant’s delimiting date cannot be extended beyond January [Redacted], 2012. When a Veteran is awarded eligibility for DEA benefits due to P&T rating the basic beginning date for the utilization of DEA benefits by an eligible child is either his or her 18th birthday or the date of their successful completion of secondary schooling, whichever is the earlier date. 38 C.F.R. § 21.3041 (a). The appellant turned 18 on January [Redacted], 2004, and the appellant graduated from secondary school on May 31, 2004. As such, her 18th birthday is the earlier date and therefore the beginning date of her eligibility for DEA benefits. See August 2017 Notice of Disagreement. This beginning date may be delayed in certain situations, including when the veteran’s permanent and total disability rating is assigned after the child reaches age 18, but before the child becomes 26 years of age. However, those exceptions do not apply in the instant case because the Veteran was awarded a P&T rating in November 2016 after the appellant’s 26th birthday. The basic ending date for DEA benefits is the child’s 26th birthday. 38 U.S.C. § 3512; 38 C.F.R. § 21.3041 (c). In the instant case, the appellant’s 26th birthday and therefore delimiting date is January [Redacted], 2012. The ending date can be extended if, among other things, the child suspends his or her program due to conditions determined by VA to have been beyond her control or she is ordered to active military duty or involuntarily ordered to full-time National Guard duty. 38 U.S.C. § 3512; 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.3041 (g), 21.3043. The Board acknowledges the Veteran’s contention on behalf of the appellant that she experienced hardships and would benefit from the use of DEA benefits. See November 2017 VA Form 9. However, the appellant does not describe what the hardships were or contend that she suspended her course of education due to conditions determined by VA to have been beyond her control or she is ordered to active military duty or involuntarily ordered to full-time National Guard duty. The appellant indicates she began college in August 2014 and continuously pursued a college degree. See August 2017 Notice of Disagreement and November 2017 VA Form 9. As such, even if the appellant is stating the hardships she endured were circumstances beyond her control, the exception under 38 C.F.R. § 21.3041 (g)(1) to permit an extension is when it results in the suspension of his or her course of study. Therefore, by its plain wording 38 C.F.R. § 21.3041 (g)(1) does not apply to a situation such as here when it is contended that the circumstances caused a delay in beginning the use of such benefits. The Board is bound by applicable law and regulations when determining a claim for VA benefits. Here, the regulatory criteria governing eligibility for DEA benefits under Chapter 35 are specific, and the Board is bound by them. Pursuant to these criteria, there is no basis upon which to grant an extension of the appellant’s period of eligibility for DEA benefits under Chapter 35 beyond January [Redacted], 2012. See 38 C.F.R. § 21.4131. The appellant is not eligible to DEA benefits after January [Redacted], 2012 under Chapter 35 as a matter of law. M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD C. Biggins, Associate Counsel 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.