Citation Nr: 21023165 Decision Date: 04/20/21 Archive Date: 04/20/21 DOCKET NO. 13-15 337 DATE: April 20, 2021 REMANDED The claim as to the propriety of the termination of the apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1968 to January 1970. The appellant is his estranged spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2012 decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which terminated the apportionment of the Veteran’s benefits that were previously awarded to the appellant. The Board notes that the appellant indicated a request for a hearing on her VA Form 9, but did not appear at the scheduled proceeding. A review of the record revealed that she was not provided with notification of the hearing. However, she did not respond to a January 2021 hearing clarification letter, thus her request is deemed withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704   In April 2015, the Board remanded this matter for further development. The claim has been returned to the Board for further appellate review at this time. At the outset, the Board notes that the April 2015 Board remand characterized the issue on appeal as relating to an apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits for the parties’ minor child. However, that is not the issue on appeal. The issue currently before the Board is that of the propriety of the termination of the apportionment of the Veteran’s compensation benefits to the appellant, who is his estranged spouse. This apportionment was previously awarded to the appellant in July 2006 and later terminated by the RO in the November 2012 decision on appeal. 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. 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 May 2013 substantive appeal. The appellant’s Form 9 contained statements that she is still married to the Veteran and new information regarding her monthly income, both of which may impact the payment of money from the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits. Accordingly, the Board finds a remand is necessary. The record reflects that the Veteran submitted a January 2016 Financial Status Report, which included his monthly income and expenses. The appellant submitted a VA Form 21-0788 in March 2006, which included her monthly income and expenses. On remand, the parties are advised to provide updated evidence regarding their monthly income and expenses. Additionally, it is somewhat unclear regarding whether the parties are currently married. The record confirms that they were married in March 1996 and the appellant stated that they were still married in May 2013. However, in January 2012, the Veteran indicated he was not married. Thus, on remand, the RO should ask the parties to verify the current status of their marriage, to include providing any related court documents or legal agreements. As such, the issue regarding the propriety of the termination of the apportionment of the Veteran’s VA compensation benefits to the appellant is remanded. 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 May 2013 substantive appeal. 2. Request that both parties provide updated income and expense information, to include any support provided to the appellant by the Veteran. 3. Ask both parties to provide all available information and documentation regarding the current status of their marriage, to include any related court documents or legal agreements. 4. Readjudicate the claim on appeal. MARTIN B. PETERS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Erin J. Trojanowski, 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.