Citation Nr: 22018919 Decision Date: 03/30/22 Archive Date: 03/30/22 DOCKET NO. 18-24 678 DATE: March 30, 2022 ORDER An effective date earlier than February 1, 2017, for service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran died in December 2015. 2. On January 12, 2016, the Appellant filed an Intent to File a Claim for Compensation; she filed a formal claim for compensation on February 1, 2017. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an effective date earlier than February 1, 2017, for service connection for the Veteran's cause of death have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 501, 5101, 5107, 5110; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.155, 3.160, 3.400. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from January 1967 to January 1969; he died in December 2015. The appellant is recognized as his surviving spouse. See April 2017 administrative decision. The agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) granted service connection for the Veteran's cause of death, effective February 1, 2017. See May 2017 rating decision. In October 2021 the appellant testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of the hearing is associated with the record. Effective Date for Service Connection for Cause of Death The Appellant seeks an effective date earlier than February 1, 2017, for DIC benefits for the Veteran's service-connected death. Specifically, an effective date of January 12, 2016, the date she submitted an Intent to File. Generally, the effective date for VA benefits is the date of receipt of the claim or the date entitlement arose, whichever is later. 38 U.S.C. § 5110(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400. If a claim for service-connected death benefits (DIC) is received within one year of a Veteran's death, the effective date is the first day of the month in which the death occurred. Otherwise, the effective date is the date of receipt of the claim or date entitlement arose. 38 U.S.C. § 5110(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(c)(2). Claims must be filed on the standard forms prescribed by the VA Secretary. A claimant may indicate their desire to file a claim for benefits by submitting an intent to file a claim to VA. If VA receives a complete application form within one year of receipt of the intent to file a claim, VA will consider the complete claim filed as of the date the intent to file a claim was received. 38 C.F.R. § 3.155(b). In other words, the date of receipt of the claim will be the same as the date of the intent to file. The Veteran died in December 2017. On January 12, 2016, VA received the appellant's completed VA Form 21-0966, Intent to File a Claim for Compensation. The form was not signed by the appellant, but by a "representative" named J.R.M. At the time of the filing, the appellant had not executed any VA Form 21-22, Appointment of Individual as Claimant's Representative. In correspondence dated January 20, 2016, VA notified the appellant that her intent to file a claim for survivor benefits was received on January 12, 2016. She was further informed that is her completed application is received within one year from the date that your intent to file was received, VA may be able to compensate her from the date VA the intent to file. That correspondence was sent to the appellant at her then-address of record; the same address provided on a VA Form 21-22 submitted in October 2016 from the appellant's representative. There is no indication that VA's January 2016 letter to the appellant was returned as undeliverable. On February 1, 2017, VA received the appellant's completed VA Form 21-534EZ for DIC benefits. At the October 2021 Board hearing, the appellant testified that after the Veteran's death she spoke with VA representative R.S. to submit a DIC claim. The appellant further testified that she went to the Regional Office every week to check-in with R.S. as to the status of her claim and was assured that "everything was fine." The appellant did not know, and had never met with, anyone named J.R.M. The appellant's representative argued that the intent to file accepted by VA was improper because it was completed by a "representative," when there was no representative of record. The representative also indicated the VA did not send the appellant an "actual application" of VA Form 21-534EZ but "told her to go to a website." The appellant submitted affidavits on behalf of herself and her sister-in-law that show she consistently checked-in on the status of her claim with representative R.S. at her local VA office. See October 2021 Third Party Correspondence. The affidavits also demonstrate that the appellant was unaware that an intent to file a claim was submitted in lieu of a completed claim. The Board finds that February 1, 2017, is the appropriate effective date. While the appellant argues that she was unaware that an Intent to File was submitted, apparently on her behalf, on January 12, 2016, VA specifically notified her of receipt of that form. The January 2016 correspondence, which was sent to the appellant's address of record, also notified her that she needed to submit a completed application within one year from the receipt of the Intent to File in order to have that date be the effective date for any compensation. Otherwise, the effective date would be the date of receipt of the claim. The representative argues that VA should have provided the appellant with the specific form necessary to complete her claim. The Board notes however, that the January 2016 correspondence from VA to the appellant identified the specific form she needed to submit, where to access the form, and the pertinent time frame within which to submit the completed form. In sum, the effective date can be no earlier that February 1, 2017, the date of receipt of the formal claim; not that January 12, 2016, date of receipt of the Intent to File because the formal claim was not received within one year. 38 C.F.R. § 3.400(r). As the evidence of record persuasively weighs against the claim, the benefit of the doubt does not apply. An effective date prior to February 1, 2017, for the grant of service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is not warranted. M.E. Larkin Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board S. E. Bresler 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.