Citation Nr: 20032389 Decision Date: 05/07/20 Archive Date: 05/07/20 DOCKET NO. 08-06 845 DATE: May 7, 2020 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant, on behalf of D-h M., D-a M., and D-n M., the parties’ children, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service from March 1995 to May 1995 and from September 2003 to November 2005. The appellant is the mother of the parties’ children. The Board notes that the children have all reached the age of 18. Thus, the appeal period will be limited to the period of time prior to the 18th birthday of each child. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2007 decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which denied an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant on behalf of their children. In November 2008, the appellant was scheduled for a videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. She cancelled the scheduled hearing. In February 2009, the Board granted the appellant’s Motion for Good Cause to reschedule the requested videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. The appellant was subsequently scheduled for a March 2009 videoconference before a Veterans Law Judge. However, she failed to report for the hearing. Therefore, the Board hearing request is considered withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704 (d). The Board previously remanded the appeal for further development in October 2010 and March 2017. The issue of entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant, on behalf of D-h M., D-a M., and D-n M., the parties’ children, 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 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. 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. Here, the appellant contends that she is entitled to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability benefits for their children. In this case, it appears that the rules regarding simultaneously contested claims have not been complied with. Specifically, the Veteran was not provided with a copy of the content of the appellant’s substantive appeal, which was received by VA in March 2008. 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 appellant’s substantive appeal. Additionally, the record indicates that the Veteran was ordered to pay child support in the amount of $208.00 per month for two of the children in May 1999. See May 1999 Order Approving Stipulated Agreement of Support. However, the record is unclear as to whether this monthly amount was increased after the birth of the parties’ third child. Furthermore, no evidence has been provided regarding the payment history of the court-ordered child support or whether an arrearage has accrued. On remand, the parties are advised to provide complete child support records, to include all related court documents, payment history documentation, the amount of any current arrearage, and proof of any payments made by the Veteran to the appellant. Although the Board previously directed the RO to attempt to obtain the appellant’s child support records from the Department of Child Support in Carthage, MS, it does not appear that such attempts were made. Thus, the RO must contact the Human Service Department of Child Support in Carthage, MS to obtain all available information regarding the appellant’s child support case. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. 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 March 2008 substantive appeal. 2. Request that both parties provide complete child support records, to include all related court documents, payment history documentation, the amount of any current arrearage, and proof of any payments made by the Veteran to the appellant. 3. Contact the Human Service Department of Child Support in Carthage, MS to obtain all available information regarding the appellant’s child support case. 3. Readjudicate the claim on appeal. MICHAEL KILCOYNE 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.