Citation Nr: 21020695 Decision Date: 04/07/21 Archive Date: 04/07/21 DOCKET NO. 16-19 155A DATE: April 7, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits is dismissed. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The appellant failed to submit information related to her annual income and net worth, which would have provided information necessary to adjudicate her claim for nonservice-connected death pension benefits, within one year of VA’s February 3, 2020, request. 2. The evidence of record is insufficient to determine whether the appellant satisfied specific income and net worth requirements such that death pension benefits were available to the appellant as a result of the Veteran’s death due to nonservice-connected conditions. CONCLUSION OF LAW The issue of entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits is considered abandoned, leaving no question of law or fact to decide regarding the issue. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from December 1965 to August 1967. Unfortunately, the Veteran died in September 2013. The appellant is his surviving spouse. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Historically, this matter was remanded in January 2019 and January 2020 Board decisions so the RO could undertake additional development, including attempting to obtain current information regarding the appellant’s annual income and net worth. The matter now returns to the Board. Death pension benefits are available for a veteran’s surviving spouse as a result of the veteran’s death due to nonservice-connected conditions if certain criteria are met. Specifically, the surviving spouse is entitled to such benefits if the veteran served for 90 days or more, part of which was during a period of war; or, if the veteran served during a period of war and was discharged from service due to a service-connected disability or had a disability determined to be service-connected, which would have justified a discharge for disability; and if the surviving spouse meets the specific income and net worth requirements. 38 U.S.C. § 1541; 38 C.F.R. § 3.3(b)(4). Most recently, in its January 2020 decision, the Board noted that the appellant had submitted the Veteran’s death certificate and VA Form 21-686c, Declaration of Status of Dependents, in October 2013. In November 2013 correspondence, the appellant was informed that her claim for death benefits had been denied due to an incomplete application. The RO supplied her with a copy of the application and asked for her to complete and resubmit it. She did not subsequently provide a completed application but has expressed her sincere belief that she has provided all requisite information to VA with respect to her net worth. As such, the Board remanded the claim in January 2020 so that she could be afforded an additional opportunity to provide necessary information about her net worth upon which to determine the claim. In its remand instructions, the Board informed the RO that it should provide the appellant with the application form for DIC, Survivors Pension, and/or Accrued Benefits, and request that she complete and submit this form, as well as any other documentation that details her current net worth and annual income. She was to be advised of precisely what information the RO still needed and afforded reasonable time to complete and submit the form. Pursuant to the Board’s remand directives, the RO sent the appellant a letter dated February 3, 2020, which requested for her to complete and submit VA Form 21-534EZ, Application for DIC, Death Pension, and/or Accrued Benefits. A copy of the form was attached to the letter. The letter also indicated that she should submit any other documentation that detailed her current net worth and annual income. She was informed that she had up to one year from the date of the letter to submit the information. However, the appellant did not respond to this letter. As a result, the RO issued a supplemental statement of the case denying her claim, after which time the matter returned to the Board. Given the lack of information in the file related to the appellant’s current net worth and annual income, this claim cannot be properly adjudicated without the information the Board requested in its January 2020 remand. In turn, this information on the appellant’s net worth and income cannot be obtained unless the appellant submits it with a completed application form. This was clearly explained in the Board’s January 2020 decision and the February 2020 correspondence sent to the appellant. It has been more than a year since the RO mailed the appellant the February 2020 correspondence asking for her to submit a completed application for death pension benefits and information on her current net worth and annual income. The appellant did not respond to the letter within a year. Moreover, the appellant, despite being fully informed of the need for this information to properly adjudicate this claim, has chosen not to provide it. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991). 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. Pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.158, when evidence is requested in connection with a claim “is not furnished within 1 year after the date of the request, the claim is considered abandoned.” 38 U.S.C. § 501; 38 C.F.R. § 3.158. Here, the Board finds that the evidence of record is insufficient to decide this appeal. Because the appellant did not respond to the February 2020 correspondence from the RO, there remain no allegations of error of fact or law for appellate consideration. Furthermore, a careful review of the claims file shows there has been substantial compliance with the Board’s January 2020 remand directives. See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998). Indeed, the RO took appropriate steps to request information from the appellant. Despite these good faith efforts, the appellant did not respond to the RO’s request. In pursuing a claim, a claimant has some responsibility to cooperate in efforts to obtain information for her claim; the duty to assist is not a one-way stress. Wood, 1 Vet. App. at 193. Accordingly, as the appellant’s claim has been abandoned, the appeal is dismissed. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Rademacher, Associate 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.