Citation Nr: 21063231 Decision Date: 10/13/21 Archive Date: 10/13/21 DOCKET NO. 14-35 333 DATE: October 13, 2021 REMANDED The issue of entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA benefits on behalf of the Veteran's dependent child, D.W., is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1978 to June 1985. The appellant is the mother and custodian of the Veteran's child, D.W. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a May 2011 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In November 2018, the Board remanded this appeal for further development, to include providing the Veteran with copies of the December 2013 Statement of the Case (SOC) and the appellant's February 2014 VA Form 9. The record reflects that these documents were mailed to the Veteran in April 2020, but the documents were returned as undeliverable. The appellant appointed Disabled American Veterans (DAV) as her representative in October 2012. While the matter was remanded, the Veteran appointed DAV as his representative. The Board attempted to clarify representation in October 2020. The Veteran did not respond to the request for clarification and the Board assumes that the Veteran wishes to remain represented by DAV. Further, in December 2020, the appellant provided an updated VA Form 21-22 (Appointment of Veterans Service Organization as Claimant's Representative) but did not appoint another representative. Therefore, the Board assumes that the appellant wishes to remain represented by DAV. The Board then requested clarification of representation from DAV. In an August 2021 Brief, DAV did not withdraw representation from either party but declined to argue for or against the pending appeal. Therefore, as DAV remains the representative for both parties after all due process has been satisfied on the matter, the Board will proceed with both parties being represented by DAV. 1. Entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA benefits on behalf of the Veteran's dependent child, D.W., is remanded. After a review of the evidence in this case, the Board has determined that the issue as developed by the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ), entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA benefits to the appellant on behalf of D.W., 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 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 entitlement to an apportionment of the Veteran's VA disability benefits on behalf of the Veteran's dependent child D.W. The Veteran is the prevailing party, as apportionment of his benefits to the appellant was denied. In this case, it appears that the rules regarding simultaneously contested claims have not been complied with. Specifically, the Board remanded this appeal to provide the Veteran with copies of the December 2013 SOC and the appellant's February 2014 VA Form 9. The record reflects that these documents were mailed to the Veteran in April 2020, but the documents were returned as undeliverable. There is no evidence that the documents were then mailed to the Veteran's updated address. Accordingly, the Board finds that 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 December 2013 SOC, as well as the content of the appellant's February 2014 substantive appeal at his current address of record. 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 December 2013 SOC, as well as the content of the appellant's February 2014 substantive appeal at the Veteran's current address of record. 2. Readjudicate the appeal. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Gastoukian, Kelly 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.