Citation Nr: 21027260 Decision Date: 05/05/21 Archive Date: 05/05/21 DOCKET NO. 17-61 972 DATE: May 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities (TDIU) for the period prior to December 19, 2017 is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from April 1988 to November 1998 and from December 1998 to May 2011. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In a March 2019 decision, the Board denied the Veteran's TDIU claim. The Veteran appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In a January 2020 Order, the Court granted the parties' JMR vacating the March 2019 decision and remanding the claim to the Board for further adjudication. The claim was remanded for additional development in June 2020. During the pendency of the remand, a February 2021 rating decision granted entitlement to a TDIU, effective December 19, 2017. As the Veteran was not awarded a TDIU for the entire period on appeal, the issue of entitlement to TDIU for the period prior to December 19, 2017 remains in appellate status, and the Board has jurisdiction to consider this matter. Harper v. Wilkie, 30 Vet. App. 356 (2018). Entitlement to a TDIU for the period prior to December 19, 2017 is remanded. The evidence indicates there may be outstanding relevant VA treatment records. VA treatment records from January 8, 2015 and October 14, 2015 note that a non-VA care record from "AR Ortho & Sports Med" from December 29, 2014 and an October 9, 2015 radiology note had been scanned into VistA Imaging. It does not appear that the referenced records have been associated with the claims file. A remand to obtain the outstanding records is required. Additionally, the June 2020 remand requested that the Veteran provide his income for each year he claimed he was precluded from gainful employment due to his service-connected disabilities, to include providing documentation verifying his income. To date, the Veteran has not provided the requested information. As the Board must remand this matter for further development, the Veteran should be afforded another opportunity to provide the requested information. The Board notes that in a February 2021 statement, the Veteran reported that his tax returns were unavailable because the "IRS will not go back that far." The Board notes that individuals who need a copy of a tax return "can get one for the current tax year and as far back as six years." https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/heres-how-to-get-prior-year-tax-information (last accessed May 3, 2021). The Veteran is advised that the failure to provide the above requested information could negatively affect his claim. Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190, 193 (1991) ("The 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."). The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the VistA Imaging records referenced in the January 8, 2015 and October 14, 2015 VA record entries. If any requested records are unavailable, the Veteran should be notified. 2. Ask the Veteran to provide detailed information regarding employment and income history for each year he claims to have been precluded from maintaining gainful employment due to service-connected disabilities. For any employment that the Veteran considers to be marginal as due to a protected work environment, request that he provide a detailed explanation as to what factors characterize the work environment as protected. 3. For all periods of self-employment, the Veteran should provide information verifying his income, such as Social Security Administration earnings statements and income tax return forms that include his net and gross profits. K. A. BANFIELD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Anderson 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.