BVA9506519 
DOCKET NO.  93-08 175     )       DATE
          )
          )

On appeal from the decision of the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Phoenix,
Arizona

THE ISSUE

Recovery of the loan guaranty indebtedness.

WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL

Appellant

ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Michael A. Pappas, Associate Counsel

INTRODUCTION

The appellant is currently on active duty with the United States
Army.

This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (the
Board) on appeal from a decision of the Phoenix, Arizona,
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office's Committee
on Waivers and Compromises (RO).  The appellant's loan guaranty
indebtedness was originally established in March 1990 in the
amount of $18,823.78, plus accrued interest.  An April 1991
decision on waiver of indebtedness by the RO granted the
appellant a partial waiver of half of the indebtedness in the
amount of $9,411.89, plus accrued interest, but denied a waiver
as to the remainder of the indebtedness in the equivalent amount
of $9,411.89, plus accrued interest.  The appeal was received and
docketed at the Board in April 1993.  The appellant has
represented himself throughout his appeal.

REMAND

One of the appellant's primary contentions is that the collection
of the loan guaranty indebtedness by the VA would create an undue
hardship to his family.  In fact, it was on the basis of undue
hardship that the appellant was granted a partial waiver.  The
most recent financial information provided by the appellant was
dated in October 1992.  In the context of that statement and in
the course of a hearing prior to its submission, the appellant
indicated that he was probably going to be transferred to a new
duty station.  Although the appellant's spouse was working at the
time, he indicated that because of the impending move his income
and perhaps her income would most likely change.  The appellant
also intimated as to the uncertainty of his future with the Army.
In addition, one of the individuals previously reported by the
appellant as a dependent was listed as such because of his status
as a college student.  That individual had already reached the age
of majority, and it is likely that by now he has completed his
college education.  Finally, the Board takes cognizance of the
fact that the referenced financial status report was unclear as to
the amount and status of the appellant's debts.

With respect to the relevance and necessity for the requirement
that the appellant provide verification of his current financial
status, including information pertaining to his spouse and any
other adult family member living in his immediate household, it is
important to remember that in an evaluation of whether "equity and
good conscience" necessitates a favorable waiver decision,
although not exhaustive, there must be considered all of the
specifically enumerated elements found in 38 C.F.R. § 1.965(a)
(1994).  A fundamental area of consideration contained within the
specifically enumerated elements is whether there would be imposed
an undue hardship of collection upon the veteran-appellant.  The
proper analysis of "undue hardship" should take into consideration
not only the appellant's current financial picture, but also a
realistic projection of his status in the foreseeable future.

Further, to the extent that the appellant's spouse, or any adult
family members residing in the appellant's household, share
financial resources with the appellant for the purpose of funding
the basic necessities of life, or are able to contribute to the
payment of any family expenses including the appellant's debt
obligations, their financial information is relevant.

VA has a duty to assist a veteran in the development of facts
pertinent to his claim.  38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991); 38
C.F.R. § 3.103(a) (1994).  The appellant's financial information
and the verification of that information are crucial to that
issue.  As such, VA's duty to assist a veteran includes a
reasonable effort to obtain that information.  However, "[T]he
duty to assist is not always a one-way street.  If a veteran
wishes help, he cannot passively wait for it in those
circumstances where he may or should have information that is
essential in obtaining the putative evidence."  Wood v. Derwinski,
1 Vet.App. 190 (1991).

Under the circumstances, the Board remands this case to the RO for
the following actions:

1.  The appellant should be provided with a
copy of this remand and another financial
status report form (VA Form 4-5655) and
asked to provide a current financial status
report.  The RO should also request from the
appellant complete copies, including all
scheduled attachments, of his Federal income
tax returns for 1992 through 1994, along
with the updated financial status report.
The current financial status report should
include financial information of the
appellant's spouse, and any other adult (18
years of age, or older) family member living
in his immediate household.  To the extent
possible, the appellant should provide
written documentation or verification of all
items contained in the financial status
report, particularly the monthly
expenditures applied to other creditors.

2.  The appellant's claim should be reviewed
by the RO.  If the benefit sought continues
to be denied, the appellant should be
provided with a supplemental statement of
the case.  That supplemental statement of
the case should specifically address those
of the six elements found in 38 C.F.R.
§ 1.965 which the RO considers to be
pertinent to the determination of whether
the appellant should be accorded a waiver of
his loan guaranty indebtedness under the
standards of "equity and good conscience."
The RO should also identify any other
elements that should be applied to the facts
and circumstances of this case indicating a
need for reasonableness and moderation in
the exercise of the Government's rights,
such as whether the appellant attempted to
mitigate the amount of the indebtedness
through efforts to avoid foreclosure or
through the proper maintenance of the
subject property.

If the benefit sought is not granted, the appellant should be
given an adequate opportunity to respond prior to the forwarding
of the appeal to the Board.  The purpose of this remand is to
procure clarifying data and to ensure due process of law.  The
Board intimates no opinion, legal or factual, as to the
determination warranted in this case by reason of this remand.  No
action by the appellant is required, until he is so notified.

          THOMAS J. DANNAHER
          Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals

The Board of Veterans' Appeals Administrative Procedures
Improvement Act, Pub. L. No. 103-271, § 6, 108 Stat. 740, ___
(1994), permits a proceeding instituted before the Board to be
assigned to an individual member of the Board for a
determination.  This proceeding has been assigned to an
individual member of the Board.

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991), only a decision of the
Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals.  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) (1994).