Citation Nr: 19142136 Decision Date: 05/31/19 Archive Date: 05/31/19 DOCKET NO. 18-23 029 DATE: May 31, 2019 ORDER Entitlement to reimbursement under the Licensing and Certification provision of the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran took a VMware Certified Professional 6 - Network Virtualization test in January 2018. 2. The Network Virtualization test has been approved by the appropriate State Approving Agency (SAA) for reimbursement. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for reimbursement or payment for fees paid for a VMware Certified Professional 6 - Network Virtualization test have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 3001 -3021, 3034, 3680A, 3689 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.4150-21.4200, 21.4268, 21.7000, 21.7110, 21.7120, 21.7122 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Air Force from October 1985 to October 2005. In January 2018, the Veteran submitted a claim for reimbursement for certification test fees paid for a VMware Certified Professional 6 - Network Virtualization test administered that month. The Regional Office (RO) denied the reimbursement in February 2018. Chapter 30 of Title 38, U.S. Code, provides, in pertinent part, that VA will provide educational assistance to an eligible veteran who is pursuing an approved program of education, or has taken an approved licensing or certification test. 38 U.S.C. §§ 3014, 3689; 38 C.F.R. § 21.7110 (a). A certification test is a test that an individual must pass in order to receive a certificate that provides an affirmation of an individual’s qualifications in a specified occupation 38 C.F.R. § 21.7020 (a)(52). It is within the jurisdiction of the respective SAA to approve the organizations or entities offering licensing and certification tests. 38 U.S.C. § 3689, 38 C.F.R. § 21.4268 (a)(1). No payment may be made for a licensing or certification test unless (1) the Secretary determines that the test is required under Federal, State or local law or regulation for an individual to enter into, maintain, or advance in employment in a predetermined and identified vocation or profession; or, (2) the Secretary determines that the test is generally accepted in accordance with relevant government, business, or industry standards, employment policies or hiring practices as attesting to a level of knowledge or skill required to qualify to enter into, maintain, or advance in employment in a predetermined and identified vocation or profession. 38 U.S.C. § 3689 (b)(1). Here, the RO initially denied the Veteran’s claim for reimbursement because it had determined that the test was not approved for reimbursement by VA. In support of this conclusion, the RO noted that tests are to be approved by the SAA in the state where the headquarters of the organization issuing the credential is located. In his March 2018 notice of disagreement, the Veteran asserted that the test was, in fact, approved, and provided a letter from VA showing his eligibility for payment, and a former reimbursement for a similar test. In a March 2018 statement of the case, the RO noted that “[a]lthough VMware Certification Program is approved by the SAA, the VMware Certified Professional 6-Network Virtualization” examination is not listed as approved in VA’s Web Enabled Approval Management System (WEAMS). WEAMS is the approval list of courses added by either a SAA or VA. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.4250 (a), 21.4268. However, it appears from the record that WEAMS does list the approval of two licenses/certifications described as “6-Network VIRTLZTN” and “VCA6 NTWRK VIRTLZTN.” The Board understands these descriptions to be referencing certifications given by VMware concerning 6-Network Virtualization, which is the type of certification granted to the Veteran in January 2018. It is a bedrock of Veterans Law that when, after careful consideration of all the procurable and assembled data, a reasonable doubt arises regarding any point, such doubt must be resolved in favor of the claimant. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. That is, when a claimant seeks benefits and the evidence is in relative equipoise, reasonable doubt is always resolved in their favor, and they prevail. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). (Continued on the next page)   Here, the RO has acknowledged that the Veteran’s Certification Program is approved by the SAA, and a reasonable interpretation of the WEAMS entries addressing that program seem to indicate that the Veteran’s specific test is covered. Accordingly, the Board finds that a reasonable doubt has been raised. Thus, as it must resolve all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, his claim for reimbursement is granted. R. FEINBERG Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Jeremy J. Olsen, 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.