Citation Nr: 22014334 Decision Date: 03/12/22 Archive Date: 03/12/22 DOCKET NO. 19-04 133 DATE: March 12, 2022 ORDER Entitlement to VA educational assistance benefits under Chapter 33, Title 38, of the United States Code for educational courses commenced after July 31, 2018, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's last discharge from active duty was on July 31, 2003 and he is not entitled to VA educational assistance benefits under Chapter 33, Title 38 United States Code for educational courses commenced after July 31, 2018. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for the award of Chapter 33 educational assistance benefits for educational courses commenced after July 31, 2018 have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 3321; 38 C.F.R.§ 21.9530. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1982 to December 1982 and January 19, 1984 to July 31, 2003. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2018 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Muskogee, Oklahoma. In October 2021, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a Board hearing. A transcript of the hearing is of record. In September 2018, the Veteran applied for educational assistance benefits under Chapters 30 and 33, Title 38, United States Code, for a college program that commenced in August 2018. By way of history, the GI Bill has gone through numerous iterations since its inception in 1944, with the different versions codified into distinct "chapters" that together form the overall statutory framework. Different chapters contain the distinct benefits programs available based on military service during different eras. The chapters exist largely as stand-alone entitiessome old, others newcontaining benefit schemes and eligibility requirements discrete unto themselves. See generally Carr v. Wilkie, 961 F.3d 1168 (June 2020); CRS Report for Congress, A Brief History of Veterans' Education Benefits and Their Value (June 25, 2008). Eligibility for education benefits under Chapter 30 (Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)) requires that an individual must first become a member of the Armed Forces or first enter active duty as a member of the Armed Forces after June 30, 1985. 38 U.S.C. § 3011; 38 C.F.R. §§ 21.7040, 21.7042. The period of eligibility under this program terminates 10 years from the date of the last discharge or release from active duty. 38 C.F.R. §21.7050. Eligibility for education benefits under Chapter 33 (Post-9/11 GI Bill) requires active-duty service after September 10, 2001, if the individual served a minimum of 90 aggregate days. 38 U.S.C. §3311; 38 C.F.R. § 21.9520. The period of eligibility under this program terminates 15 years from the date of the last discharge or release from active duty. 38 C.F.R.§ 21.9530. In denying the Veteran's application for education benefits under Chapters 30 and 33 in October 2018, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) informed him that his eligibility terminated under Chapter 30 on July 31, 2013 and under Chapter 33 on July 31, 2018. The Veteran appeals the denial of education benefits under Chapter 33. The period of eligibility for Chapter 33, Post-9/11 GI Bill, educational benefits may be extended beyond the 15-year limit under the circumstances enumerated in 38 U.S.C. § 3031 (b) through (d) as referenced by 38 U.S.C. § 3321(b). Such circumstances include a change in nature of discharge, detention by a foreign government, and existence of a physical or mental disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 303(b), (c), (d). VA regulations also identify the circumstances under which the period may be extended. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 21.9535(a), the period of eligibility can be extended if the Veteran "was prevented from initiating or completing the chosen program of education because of physical or mental disability, that did not result from the veteran's willful misconduct" and he "applies for an extension within the time specified in 38 C.F.R. § 21.1033(c)." 38 C.F.R. § 21.9535(a). The record in this case does not indicate that the Veteran has met any of the above criteria for extending his delimiting date. The Veteran asserts that he should not have a delimiting date under the Post-9/11 GI Bill because the Forever GI Bill eliminated the 15-year cap on using these benefits. The Board recognizes that the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2017, Pub. L. No. 115-48, § 112 (enacted Aug. 16, 2017), also known as the Forever GI Bill, eliminated the 15-year delimiting date for Chapter 33 benefits for those veterans who were discharged from service on or after January 1, 2013. See 38 U.S.C. § 3321(a)(2). However, the Veteran in this case was discharged prior to January 1, 2013 and therefore the Forever GI Bill does not remove the 15-year delimiting date. The Board has considered the Veteran's statements and hearing testimony that he is being unfairly denied the benefits under the Forever GI Bill. In this regard, he reported in the April 2017 Notice of Disagreement that he served on active duty for 22 years including during the 9/11 timeframe, and he considers it an insult to be denied access to benefits under the Forever Post 9/11 GI Bill. He said that he and others who served with him laid their lives down for this country's freedom and that they should not be denied these benefits. The Board is sympathetic to the Veteran's particular circumstances and is grateful for his honorable service to this country, but the Board lacks the legal authority to award benefits outside the scope of the law and has no authority to grant claims on an equitable basis. See 38 U.S.C. § 7104; Harvey v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 416, 425 (1994) ("No equities, no matter how compelling, can create a right to payment out of the United States Treasury that has not been provided for by Congress"). It follows that since the Veteran was not discharged from active duty on or after January 1, 2013, he is not entitled to benefits under the Forever GI Bill to include removal of the 15-year delimiting date. 38 U.S.C. §3321. There simply is no provision of law in which the Board may grant the Veteran the benefits that he seeks. Accordingly, the appeal is denied. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426 (1994). H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Shawkey, Anne M. 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.