Citation Nr: 22042011 Decision Date: 07/22/22 Archive Date: 07/22/22 DOCKET NO. 18-34 431A DATE: July 22, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to waiver of recovery of an overpayment of Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) compensation benefits in the amount of $7,295.07, to include the validity of the debt is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from November 1979 to August 1999. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2018 decision of the Committee on Waivers and Compromises (COWC) of the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ). One month later, the COWC issued a decision that granted a waiver of recovery of an overpayment in the amount of $7,295.07, but for reasons explained below, this matter remains on appeal. Entitlement to waiver of recovery of an overpayment of VA compensation benefits in the amount of $7,295.07, to include the validity of the debt, is remanded. The Veteran was awarded an additional VA compensation benefit based on his dependent spouse, after the AOJ determined he met the requirements to receive an additional VA compensation benefit. At the time he was awarded this additional benefit, he was also informed that the law did not permit the Veteran to receive both military retirement pay and VA compensation benefits. Thus, the AOJ would withhold VA compensation benefits until the military calculated his retirement pay. See October 1999 notification letter. In a November 2016 letter, the AOJ informed the Veteran that he did not respond to a request for information letter asking about his dependents. As such, the AOJ proposed to reduce his VA compensation benefits. Thereafter, in December 2017, the AOJ reduced his VA compensation benefits by removing the additional dependent benefit, which created an overpayment. In addition, the AOJ informed him that military retirement pay would again be withheld. In December 2017, the Debt Management Center (DMC) issued a letter that an overpayment in the amount of $7,295.07 was created. After the Veteran provided the requested information in January 2018, the AOJ found that he remained eligible to receive an additional dependent benefit. That benefit was reinstated back to the same date the AOJ noted in the November 2016 letter. See March 2018 notification letter. Around the same time that reinstatement was happening, the COWC received the Veteran's waiver request. In May 2018, the COWC denied the waiver request, and the Veteran timely appealed this decision. The Veteran had also challenged the validity of the debt. In support of his challenge, he submitted a letter from Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) that indicated he was not receiving military retirement pay. See June 2018 email correspondence and correspondence. In June 2022, the COWC reconsidered the additional evidence and issued a decision that granted the waiver of the overpayment in the entire amount of $7,295.07. However, in July 2022, the DMC still issued an overpayment demand letter in the same amount, thereby indicating that a debt remained. Generally, 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. In this case, since a waiver was granted, the appeal appears to be rendered moot. However, given the fact that a debt letter was issued one month after a waiver of the overpayment and the AOJ has not determined the issue regarding validity of the debt, a remand is warranted for the AOJ to resolve this discrepancy. The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Review and verify the June 2022 COWC decision letter and prepare a decision notice letter confirming the discharge of debt by the appropriate AOJ and the Veteran should be provided a copy of this decision notice letter. 2. If a debt remains, provide an audit, statement, or other appropriate explanation of the Veteran's account. This audit or statement should include a clear and detailed explanation of the amount and source of any overpayment debt arising from the alleged military retirement pay referenced in the December 2017 notification letter sent to the Veteran. The Veteran should be provided with a copy of this audit or statement. Cory M. Picton Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Tang, 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.