Citation Nr: 20007172 Decision Date: 01/28/20 Archive Date: 01/28/20 DOCKET NO. 15-06 944 DATE: January 28, 2020 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an increased apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant, on behalf of the child I.R., is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1979 to November 1991 and from February 2001 to October 2001. The appellant is the Veteran’s former spouse and mother of their child. This appeal is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a June 2012 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In that decision, the RO granted an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability benefits to the appellant, on behalf of the child I.R., in the amount of $200.00 per month, effective December 1, 2011. The appellant appealed the amount of the apportionment. The Veteran did not appeal. In March 2019, the appellant testified during a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript is included in the claims file. The issue of entitlement to an increased apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant, on behalf of the child I.R., is remanded. After a review of the evidence in this case, the Board has determined that this matter is not ripe for appellate review, as all steps necessary to ensure the procedural and due process rights of the parties have not been completed. This case involves a simultaneously contested claim; therefore, the provisions of 38 U.S.C. § 7105A (2012) are applicable. Cases involving simultaneously contested claims are also subject to special procedural regulations. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100, 19.101, 19.102, 20.500, 20.501, 20.502, 20.503, 20.504 (2018). Specifically, 38 C.F.R. § 19.100 provides that, in a simultaneously contested claim, all interested parties are to be notified of the action taken by the AOJ and of the right and time limit for initiating an appeal, as well as notification of the right to a hearing and representation. Upon the filing of a notice of disagreement, all interested parties will be furnished a copy of the statement of the case (SOC). 38 C.F.R. § 19.101. When a substantive appeal is filed, the content will be furnished to the other contesting parties to the extent that it contains information which could directly affect the payment or potential payment of the benefit which is the subject of the contested claim. 38 C.F.R. § 19.102. If a hearing is scheduled for any party to a simultaneously contested claim, the other contesting claimants and their representatives, if any, will be notified and afforded an opportunity to be present. The appellant will be allowed to present opening testimony and argument. Thereafter, any other contesting party who wishes to do so may present testimony and argument. The appellant will then be allowed an opportunity to present testimony and argument in rebuttal. Cross-examination is not permitted. 38 C.F.R. § 20.713. Here, the appellant, who is the non-prevailing party, contends that she is entitled to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability benefits for their child. The Veteran is the prevailing party, as an apportionment of his benefits to the appellant was denied. A close review of the claims file reveals that VA has not fulfilled its obligations under the procedures relating to contested claims. Specifically, there is no indication in the claims file that the Veteran was provided notice of the appellant’s March 2019 Board hearing, to include his right to present testimony and argument. Additionally, the Veteran was not provided with a copy of the content of the appellant’s February 2015 substantive appeal. Accordingly, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to ensure full compliance with the contested claims procedures pursuant to 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04, to include providing the Veteran with a copy of the content of the February 2015 substantive appeal and the March 2019 Board hearing transcript. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO should provide the Veteran with a copy of the March 2019 hearing transcript. The RO should also afford him an opportunity to respond and/or request his own hearing on this matter. 2. In addition, the RO should ensure full compliance with the contested claims procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04. Specifically, ensure that the Veteran is provided with the content of the appellant’s February 2015 substantive appeal. (Continued on the next page)   3. Thereafter, an accounting should be drafted that illustrates VA’s monetary payments to the Veteran over the period of the appeal. Additionally, he should be requested to submit information regarding his itemized monthly income and expenses over the course of the appeal. The appellant should also be asked to submit any updated financial information as well. Eric S. Leboff Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Erin J. Trojanowski, 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.