Citation Nr: 20046519 Decision Date: 07/13/20 Archive Date: 07/13/20 DOCKET NO. 19-26 417 DATE: July 13, 2020 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from July 1982 to December 2002. The appellant is the Veteran’s former spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal of an October 2015 decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. The issue of entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits 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 (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. Here, the appellant, who is the non-prevailing party, contends that she is entitled to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA disability benefits. The Board notes that she contended that the Veteran owes her a significant amount of alimony. The Board notes upon a divorce from a veteran, the former spouse loses status as a veteran’s spouse, including any potential entitlement to an apportionment of VA disability compensation, effective from the date of the divorce. See 38 U.S.C. § 101(31); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.1(j), 3.50; Marrero v. Gober, 14 Vet. App. 80, 82 (2000). A divorce severs the dependent relationship. The appellant and Veteran were divorced in April 2010, prior to the date of filing of the current claim in January 2014. The Veteran is the prevailing party, as an apportionment of his benefits to the appellant was denied. In this case, it appears that the rules regarding simultaneously contested claims have not been followed. Specifically, the Veteran was not provided with a copy of the appellant’s August 2019 substantive appeal. Accordingly, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to ensure full compliance with 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 August 2019 substantive appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ensure full compliance with contested claims procedures outlined in 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.100-02, 20.500-04. Specifically, ensure that the Veteran is provided with a copy of the content of the appellant’s August 2019 substantive appeal. 2. Inform the Veteran of his right to file a substantive appeal (VA Form 9) and to have a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge (should he so elect). MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Kelly A. Gastoukian 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.