Citation Nr: 1329141	
Decision Date: 09/11/13    Archive Date: 09/17/13

DOCKET NO.  07-12 385	)	DATE
	)


On appeal from the decision of the 
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in 
Hartford, Connecticut


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for osteomyelitis of the pelvis.


REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans


ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

Mary C. Suffoletta, Counsel 


INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from June 1966 to May 1969.

This matter initially came to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2006 decision of the RO that, in pertinent part, denied a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for service-connected osteomyelitis of the pelvis.  The Veteran timely appealed.

In May 2010 and in March 2013, the Board remanded the matter for additional development. The Board is satisfied there was substantial compliance with its remand orders.  See Dyment v. West, 13 Vet. App. 141, 146-47 (1999); Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).  
 
The Court has recently held that a request for a TDIU, whether expressly raised by the Veteran or reasonably raised by the record, is not a separate "claim" for benefits, but rather, can be part of a claim for increased compensation.  Rice v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 447, 453-54 (2009).  The Board notes that the Veteran already has been awarded TDIU benefits.  Thus, the matter is not raised by the record, and the Board finds it unnecessary to remand the matter for further action.

Lastly, in addition to reviewing the Veteran's paper claims file, the Board has surveyed the contents of his Virtual VA file.


FINDINGS OF FACT

1.	The Veteran in this case served on active duty from June 1966 to May 1969. 

2.	On May 21, 2013, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran, that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested.


CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran (or his authorized representative) have been met.  38 U.S.C.A. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2012).


REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

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.A. § 7105 (West 2002).  An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2012).  Withdrawal may be made by the Veteran or by his authorized representative.  38 C.F.R. § 20.204.  In the present case, the Veteran has withdrawn this appeal and, hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration.  Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed.


ORDER

The appeal is dismissed.




		
S. S. TOTH 
	Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals




Department of Veterans Affairs