Citation Nr: 21027319 Decision Date: 05/05/21 Archive Date: 05/05/21 DOCKET NO. 15-31 284 DATE: May 5, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to basic eligibility for Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) home loan guaranty benefits is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran completed a total of 81 days of initial active duty for training in the United States Marine Corps prior to his discharge from service under honorable conditions. 2. The Veteran was not discharged because of a service-connected disability. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to VA home loan guaranty benefits have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 3701, 3702. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on initial active duty for training in the United States Marine Corps from April 3, 1973 to June 22, 1973. As a preliminary matter, the Board observes that the Veteran requested a Board hearing for his appeal concerning entitlement to VA home loan guaranty benefits. See June 2015 VA Form 9. In August 2018 correspondence mailed to the Veteran's latest address of record, the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) requested the Veteran confirm his willingness and ability to attend a Board hearing scheduled in October 2018. The August 2018 correspondence was returned as undeliverable. In November 2018, another letter was mailed to the Veteran's latest address of record requesting that he confirm his willingness and ability to attend a Board hearing scheduled in either January, February, or March 2019. The November 2018 correspondence was returned as undeliverable, with a forwarding address provided. In April 2019, the AOJ mailed notification to the Veteran (at the forwarding address received by VA in November 2018) that he was scheduled for a Board hearing in May 2019. The April 2019 correspondence was returned to VA. The Veteran's home address was most recently updated in September 2020. A new letter was mailed to the Veteran in March 2021, advising the Veteran of his options for a Board hearing. The letter also advised the Veteran that if a response was not received within 30 days of the March 2021 letter, the Board would proceed with adjudication of the Veteran's appeal without a Board hearing. The 30 days following the date of the March 2021 letter has expired. The March 2021 letter has not been returned as undeliverable, nor has the Veteran submitted any communication, written or otherwise, pertaining to his request for a hearing. The Board finds that the efforts taken to schedule the Veteran for his requested hearing have been adequate, and that taking additional efforts at this point would be futile, serving only to further delay adjudication of the appeal. The Board will accordingly proceed with adjudication. VA Home Loan Guaranty Benefits The Veteran requested a certificate of eligibility for VA home loan guaranty benefits in October 2014. See also February 2015 VA Form 26-1880. In a February 2015 decision, the AOJ notified the Veteran that he was not eligible for VA home loan guaranty benefits because he did not meet the minimum active duty service requirement. The Veteran timely perfected his appeal of the February 2015 decision. For the purpose of eligibility for benefits under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 37, to include VA home loan guaranty benefits, veterans must generally meet the minimum active duty service requirement. As applicable in this case, the minimum active duty service requirement for veterans who served during the Vietnam-era is 90 days or more. See 38 U.S.C. § 3702(a)(2)(A). The minimum active duty service requirement does not apply to a veteran who was discharged or released from a period of active duty for a service-connected disability. In reviewing the evidence of record, the Veteran enlisted in the Marine Corps Reserve on March 1, 1973, and entered initial active duty for training on April 3, 1973. See June 1973 Administrative Discharge; see also DD Form 214. Prior to completing his initial active duty for training, the Veteran was discharged on June 22, 1973 for fraudulent enlistment with a characterization of service under honorable conditions. The Veteran served a total of 81 days on active duty for training. The evidence of record does not suggest, and the Veteran has not asserted, that he was discharged due to a service-connected disability. In his February 2015 notice of disagreement, the Veteran reported he was aware that his service did not meet the minimum active duty service requirement, but that such was not through any fault of his own. The Veteran reported that his discharge for fraudulent enlistment was based on his pre-service police record. See September 2013 VA Form 21-4138; see also June 1973 Administrative Discharge. The Veteran indicated that his recruiting officer was aware that he had a pending criminal charge prior to service, and that the charge was dropped so that the Veteran would be able to enlist. The Veteran indicated that he was shocked when he was informed during recruit training that he was being separated from service for fraudulent enlistment, and that he was unable to obtain a statement from his recruiting officer concerning the circumstances of his enlistment and his pre-service police record. Based on the Veteran's total of 81 days of active duty for training, he does not meet the minimum active duty service requirement of 90 days or more. The Board recognizes the Veteran's argument that he did not voluntarily choose to separate from service prior to completing his military service obligation. However, the Board does not have the authority to grant claims on an equitable basis. The Board is bound by the statutory requirements of 38 U.S.C. § 3702. As the Veteran does not meet the minimum active duty service requirement, or the exception to the minimum active duty service requirement based on discharge due to a service-connected disability, his claim for entitlement to VA home loan guaranty benefits must be denied. V. Chiappetta Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board B. Mask, 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.