Citation Nr: 21041797 Decision Date: 07/10/21 Archive Date: 07/10/21 DOCKET NO. 16-40 165 DATE: July 10, 2021 ORDER The appeal as to entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder is moot, and the claim is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. As the appellant's character of discharge is dishonorable for VA purposes, it is a bar to entitlement to VA compensation benefits. 2. In a September 2015 rating decision, service connection for schizophrenia was erroneously granted, with a 100 percent disability rating assigned effective from June 8, 2014; the appellant appealed for an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection. 3. During the pendency of the earlier effective date claim, the RO severed service connection for schizophrenia based on the character of the appellant's discharge from service, and the appellant timely appealed that determination to the Board. 4. In a June 2020 decision, the Board denied restoration of service connection for schizophrenia. 5. As service connection for schizophrenia has been severed, there can be no earlier effective date for the grant of service connection as the rating decision granting service connection for schizophrenia was void ab initio. CONCLUSION OF LAW The appeal seeking entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for schizophrenia is rendered moot. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Appellant served on active duty from October 1968 to September 1971. This case is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2015 rating decision issued by the Regional Office (RO). In a September 2015 rating decision, service connection for schizophrenia was granted, with a 100 percent disability rating, effective June 8, 2014. The Appellant filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) in September 2015, requesting an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection. The RO issued a statement of the case (SOC) in July 2016, and the Appellant submitted a VA Form 9, requesting a hearing with the Board, in July 2016. In a September 2016 administrative decision, it was determined that the Appellant's character of discharge was a bar to all benefits, and that it was, therefore, clear and unmistakable error (CUE) to grant service connection for schizophrenia during the Appellant's period of active service. In a September 2016 rating decision, the RO proposed to sever service connection, explaining that the August 2015 administrative decision which determined that the Appellant's character of discharge was honorable for VA purposes was clearly and unmistakably erroneous. The RO then determined that the Appellant's character of discharge was dishonorable for VA purposes. The related issue of whether the severance of service connection for unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder was proper was previously before the Board in June 2020. The RO issued a July 2017 rating decision severing service connection for unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder effective October 1, 2017. The Appellant testified before the Board in a March 2020 video conference hearing, and in the June 2020 decision, the Board found that the severance of service connection for unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder was proper. In that decision, the Board found that the RO followed the proper due process steps for severing service connection and that the severance of service connection was proper because there was clear and unmistakable evidence that the Appellant's character of discharge is a bar to payment of benefits. Even though service connection is shown to be effective from June 2014 through October 2017, the Board finds that those dates are for payment purposes only, and are necessary to avoid an overpayment of funds. In addition, the law and regulation governing severance dictates that if no new evidence is submitted to show that service connection should not be severed following the proposed action, then under 3.105(d), the award will be discontinued effective the last day of the month in which a 60-day period from the date of the notice of the final rating action expires. Thus, the October 1, 2017 date was legally correct for purposes of the date of discontinuance of payment. However, once service connection is severed on the basis of CUE, it is as if the rating decision that granted the claim never occurred. Under 3.105(a)(ii), effective date of reversed or revised decisions: the rating decision which constitutes a reversal or revision of a prior decision on the grounds of CUE has the same effect as if the corrected decision had been made on the date of the reversed decision. Thus, it was void ab initio. Accordingly, there is no remaining question as to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection because the effect of the severance essentially voids any service connection effective date issue. Because the Appellant was never entitled to service connection, and the finding of CUE renders the September 2015 rating decision void, the issue of entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for unspecified schizophrenia spectrum disorder is now moot. Service connection was in effect from June 2014 until October 2017, even though a reversal because of CUE is as though the original September 2015 decision was never issued. However, because of severance rules and due process, the RO could not assign the effective date of the award discontinuance as June 8, 2014, despite the fact that the severance technically renders the rating decision granting service connection void ab initio. Thus, payment was discontinued on October 1, 2017, there was no overpayment issued, and the Appellant did not owe money to VA for benefits received prior to that date. The Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. Here, as a result of the AOJ's action, there no longer remains a case or controversy with respect to this earlier effective date claim. The Board therefore lacks jurisdiction over the appeal as to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for schizophrenia, and it is dismissed. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. Additionally, the Board's February 2021 hearing letter was issued in error because, as a result of the severance of service connection, there is no longer an earlier effective date issue on appeal. In other words, there can be no earlier effective date of service connection if there is no grant of service connection. As to the earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for schizophrenia, the claim has been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. As such, the Board finds that any error related to the duties to notify or assist on those claims is moot. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159; Mlechick v. Mansfield, 503 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2007). L. B. CRYAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Labi, 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.