Citation Nr: 1323533	
Decision Date: 07/24/13    Archive Date: 08/01/13

DOCKET NO.  09-38 199	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office and Insurance Center in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to waiver of recovery of a $14,944.69 overpayment of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) compensation benefits, to include the issue of whether the overpayment was properly created.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J. Davitian, Counsel




INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from October 1964 to October 1968. 

This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a June 2009 decision of the Committee on Waivers & Compromises (COWC) of the VA Regional Office and Insurance Center (ROIC) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  The decision denied a request for waiver of recovery of an overpayment of compensation benefits in the amount of $16,278.86.  

The relevant procedural history includes a January 22, 2008, VA letter that informed the Veteran of an award action taken to terminate his pension (sic) as of February 12, 2007.  This action created the original indebtedness of $16,278.86.  A May 2009 VA letter informed the Veteran that VA had previously stopped his award completely, effective February 12, 2007.  The letter informed the Veteran that VA was reducing his benefits to 10 percent, effective February 14, 2007.  The letter noted that this action reduced his debt by $1,334.17 [to $14,944.69].  

The RO in Manchester, New Hampshire, has jurisdiction of the Veteran's claims file.  

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

On an April 2011 VA Form 9, the Veteran requested a BVA hearing by live video conference.  A review of the record before the Board indicates that the Veteran was never provided a hearing before the Board.  It also indicates that he has not withdrawn this hearing request.  Thus, the RO should schedule such a hearing at the Manchester RO.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107 (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. §§ 19.75, 19.76, 20.703, 20.704 (2012).

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

Schedule the Veteran for a video conference hearing at the Manchester RO before a Veterans Law Judge.  Notify the Veteran in writing of the date, time and location of the hearing.  After the hearing is conducted, or if the Veteran withdraws the hearing request, or if he fails to report for the scheduled hearing without good cause, the claims file should be returned to the Board, in accordance with appellate procedures.

The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).



_________________________________________________
M. E. LARKIN
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).