Citation Nr: 25005087
Decision Date: 04/15/25	Archive Date: 04/15/25

DOCKET NO. 17-45 051A
DATE: April 15, 2025

REMANDED

The propriety of the termination of the apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the Appellant, effective October 1, 2016, is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran had active service from February 1981 to May 1990.  He also had a period of active duty for training from August 1980 to November 1980. 

The Appellant is the Veteran's ex-wife.  See September 12, 2016 Divorce Decree received December 12, 2016. 

This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2017 decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which terminated the apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the Appellant, effective October 1, 2016

As noted above, a September 2017 decision terminated the apportionment to the Appellant, effective October 1, 2017.  In response to that decision, the Appellant filed a notice of disagreement.  See September 18, 2017 VA Form 21-0958.  While the Appellant's notice of disagreement was acknowledged in a March 12, 2018 correspondence, a statement of the case regarding the propriety of the termination of the apportionment has not been issued.  Accordingly, the issue must be remanded for the RO to issue a statement of the case.  See Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238, 240-41 (1999).  This issue should only be returned to the Board if it is timely perfected.

The matters are REMANDED for the following action:

Undertake all actions required by 38 C.F.R. § 19.101, including issuing a SOC to all interested parties and their representatives (if any) regarding the issue of the propriety of the termination of the apportionment of the Veteran's VA compensation benefits to the Appellant, effective October 1, 2016.  The issue should only be returned to the Board if a timely substantive appeal is filed.

 

 

MARTIN B. PETERS

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	J. Anderson

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 This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.