Citation Nr: 18149536 Decision Date: 11/09/18 Archive Date: 11/09/18 DOCKET NO. 10-33 109 DATE: November 9, 2018 REMANDED Entitlement to a waiver of compensation overpayment in the amount of $8,730.00 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from March 1976 to August 1984 and from June 1991 to May 1993. In December 2012, the case was remanded by another Veterans Law Judge for additional development. The case has now been assigned to the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. Entitlement to a waiver of compensation overpayment in the amount of $8,730.00. A review of the record indicates that the debt at issue in this case was created as a result of the Veteran’s incarceration after conviction of a felony. The Veteran has requested a waiver of the debt because he alleges that his repayment of such debt would cause undue financial hardship. To support his waiver request, he submitted financial information on a VA Form 5655 (Financial Status Report) in January 2010. The Board’s December 2012 remand instructed the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) to prepare an audit of the Veteran’s disability compensation account, clearly setting forth the time period of the overpayment at issue (to include the month and year when the overpayment began and the month and year when it ended) as well as the total amount of the overpayment. The AOJ was then instructed to associate this audit report with the claims file and to send a copy to the Veteran and his representative. Thereafter, the AOJ was instructed to adjudicate the issue of the validity of the debt (as the Board noted that an October 2009 statement from the Veteran and a December 2011 brief from his representative appeared to be challenging the validity of the creation of the debt), followed by readjudication of the issue of entitlement to a waiver of compensation overpayment in the amount of $8,730.00. In November 2013, the AOJ completed the requested audit and associated the audit report with the claims file. The AOJ then mailed the Veteran a November 2013 letter notifying him as to how his debt was calculated and that he would need to provide updated financial information (on an enclosed VA Form 5655) so that his waiver request could be reviewed again. Also in November 2013, the AOJ mailed the Veteran a copy of the audit report. In a December 2013 decisional letter mailed to the Veteran, the AOJ determined that the debt was valid. However, the Board notes that all three of the aforementioned mailings to the Veteran were returned to the sender as undeliverable. The Veteran updated his mailing address with VA in April 2017. Thereafter, there is no evidence of record to indicate that the AOJ re-sent the three mailings (outlined above) that had been returned to the sender. In December 2017, the AOJ issued a supplemental statement of the case (SSOC) which continued a denial of the Veteran’s waiver request. In light of the above, the Board finds that the Veteran has not been provided with proper notice of the November 2013 audit or how his debt was calculated and then found to be valid, nor has he been given an opportunity to submit updated financial information. On remand, corrective action must be undertaken. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Send the following items to the Veteran’s updated current mailing address: notification as to how his debt was calculated (as outlined in the November 2013 letter that was returned to the sender); a VA Form 5655 so he can provide updated financial information to VA; a copy of the November 2013 audit report; and a copy of the December 2013 decisional letter wherein the AOJ determined that his debt was valid. 2. Thereafter, review the record, ensure that all development is completed (and arrange for any further development suggested by additional evidence received), and readjudicate the claim on appeal for entitlement to a waiver of compensation overpayment in the amount of $8,730.00. If the benefit sought on appeal remains denied, in whole or in part, an SSOC must be provided to the Veteran and his representative. After the Veteran and his representative have had an adequate opportunity to respond, the appeal must be returned to the Board for appellate review. M. SORISIO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. B. Yantz, Counsel