Citation Nr: 21068580 Decision Date: 11/10/21 Archive Date: 11/10/21 DOCKET NO. 12-29 898 DATE: November 10, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to non-service-connected pension benefits is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran has failed to meet his evidentiary burden of providing requested financial information for purposes of establishing entitlement to non-service-connected pension benefits. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an award of non-service-connected pension benefits have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1521; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.3, 3.21, 3.23, 3.271, 3.272, 3.277. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from October 1995 to October 1998. He also had service in the Army National Guard. His decorations include the Army Lapel Button, the Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Army Service Ribbon. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2011 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office in Honolulu, Hawaii. The procedural history of this case has been detailed at length in prior remands issued in January 2015, January 2018, July 2019, and November 2020. Most recently, in May 2021, the Board remanded the case to the agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) for additional development. After taking further action, the AOJ confirmed and continued the prior denial and returned the case to the Board. See July 2021 supplemental statement of the case. Entitlement to non-service-connected pension benefits is denied. The Veteran seeks to establish entitlement to non-service-connected pension benefits. Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 1521(a), non-service-connected disability pension is a benefit payable to a veteran of a period of war who is permanently and totally disabled from non-service-connected disability not the result of his own willful misconduct. A veteran is entitled to pension only if his income is not in excess of the applicable maximum annual pension rate (MAPR), as specified at 38 C.F.R. § 3.23 and changed periodically, as reported in the Federal Register. See 38 U.S.C. § 1521. The maximum rates for a veteran's pension are reduced dollar for dollar by the amount of the countable income of a veteran, his spouse, and any dependent(s). 38 U.S.C. § 1521; 38 C.F.R. § 3.23(d). Pursuant to the May 2021 Board's remand, the AOJ sent the Veteran a notice letter in May 2021 requesting that he provide his employment history, gross earnings, and unreimbursed medical expenses for the period on appeal from August 2010. See also November 2020 VA notice letter. The May 2021 VA letter also notified the Veteran that his profit and loss tax forms from 2015 to 2019, which he reportedly submitted in July 2020, were not received by VA. He was asked to resubmit those forms. As a condition of granting or continuing pension, VA may require from any person who is an applicant for or a recipient of pension such information, proofs, and evidence as is necessary to determine the annual income and the value of the corpus of the estate of such person. 38 C.F.R. § 3.277(a). The Board notes that, to date, the requested information with respect to the Veteran's employment history, income, and unreimbursed medical expenses has not been received. His failure to provide the requested information makes it impossible for VA to determine his eligibility. The Veteran has a duty to aid VA in developing his claim. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991) (noting that the duty to assist is not a one-way street; if a claimant wishes help in developing her/his claim, s/he cannot passively wait for it in those circumstances where s/he may or should have information that is essential in obtaining putative evidence). In the October 2021 post-remand brief, the Veteran's representative asserted that "[a]lthough a letter was mailed to the Veteran on May 27, 2021, no response has been received by the VA, however, in our opinion the appellant may have legitimate mitigating circumstance for not responding to the letter, and therefore, should be given another chance." The representative did not provide any explanation as to what mitigating circumstances may have caused the Veteran to fail to respond to VA's request for additional information. Indeed, the statement appears to be in the nature of mere conjecture. Without more, the Board is unable to find that there was good cause for the Veteran's failure to provide the requested information such that he should be provided yet another opportunity to do so. Because the Veteran did not respond to VA's request for additional information, the Board is constrained to find that he has not met his evidentiary burden in connection with his claim for non-service-connected pension benefits. Under the circumstances, the Board must find that the claim is without legal merit. Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426, 430 (1994). The appeal is denied. DAVID A. BRENNINGMEYER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Ragheb, 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.