Citation Nr: 0007211 Decision Date: 03/16/00 Archive Date: 03/23/00 DOCKET NO. 95-06 891 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Seattle, Washington THE ISSUE Whether an overpayment of disability compensation benefits, in the calculated amount of $656, was properly created. ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD John Z. Jones, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran retired from the United States Army in February 1980 with over fifteen years of verified active duty service. This matter has come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a decision of the Seattle, Washington, Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) which determined that an overpayment was created on the veteran's account as a result of retroactive discontinuance of his disability compensation benefits effective October 1, 1993. The original amount of the overpayment was determined to be $656. The RO has construed the veteran's notice of disagreement to pertain to the matter of creation only and has not developed the question of waiver. Hence, the issue is limited to that set forth on the title page of this preliminary order. REMAND In June 1998, the Board remanded the claim to the RO to clarify the veteran's intent with respect to representation before VA. In addition, the Board noted that there were references in the claims folder to a loan guaranty debt established in 1986 and instructed the RO to obtain and associate with the claims folder the veteran's loan guaranty file. Upon review, the Board notes that the veteran's loan guaranty file has not been associated with the claims file. The Board is obligated by law to ensure that the RO complies with its directives, as well as those of the Court. The Court has stated that compliance by the Board or the RO is neither optional nor discretionary. Where the remand orders of the Board or the Court are not complied with, the Board errs as a matter of law when it fails to ensure compliance. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). On the basis of the above and pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 19.9, the Board determines that further development of the evidence is essential for a proper appellate decision and, therefore, remands the matter to the RO for the following action: The RO should obtain and associate with the claims file the veteran's loan guaranty folder. If there is no loan guaranty folder available, this fact should be documented and also associated with the claims folder. Thereafter, the case should be returned to the Board for further appellate review. The purpose of this REMAND is to obtain additional evidence and ensure that the veteran is afforded all due process of law. The Board intimates no opinion, either factual or legal, as to the ultimate conclusion warranted in this case. No action is required by the veteran until contacted by the RO. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded to the regional office. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment by the RO. 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 The Veterans' Benefits Improvements Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-446, § 302, 108 Stat. 4645, 4658 (1994), 38 U.S.C.A. § 5101 (West Supp. 1999) (Historical and Statutory Notes). In addition, VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1, Part IV, directs the ROs to provide expeditious handling of all cases that have been remanded by the Board and the Court. See M21-1, Part IV, paras. 8.44- 8.45 and 38.02-38.03. DEBORAH W. SINGLETON Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 1991 & Supp. 1999), 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) (1999).