Citation Nr: 18144608 Decision Date: 10/25/18 Archive Date: 10/24/18 DOCKET NO. 15-05 265 DATE: October 25, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for right eye trauma is dismissed. REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for aortic valve stenosis is remanded. FINDING OF FACT In September 2018, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the Veteran that he wished to withdraw his claim for service connection for right eye trauma. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for withdrawal of the claim for service connection for right eye trauma by the appellant have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (b)(2), (d)(5) (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1977 to August 1998 in the United States Coast Guard. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2012 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. The Veteran initially requested a Board hearing. However, he withdrew his hearing request in September 2018 written correspondence. 1. Entitlement to service connection for right eye trauma 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. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his authorized representative. Id. In September 2018, the Veteran submitted a statement stating that he wished to withdraw his claim of entitlement to service connection for right eye trauma. Thus, there remain no allegations of errors or fact or law for appellate consideration on this issue. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review this claim and it is dismissed. REASONS FOR REMAND 1. Entitlement to service connection for aortic valve stenosis is remanded. Service connection is available for congenital diseases that are aggravated in service; however, service connection is not available for congenital defects unless subjected to a superimposed disease or injury. Quirin v. Shinseki, 22 Vet. App. 390, 394 (2009); Monroe v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 513, 515 (1993). In cases where the appellant seeks service connection for a congenital condition, the Board must indicate whether the condition is a disease or defect and discuss application of the presumption of soundness as indicated. Quirin, 22 Vet. App. at 394-97 In an August 2018 Disability Benefits Questionnaire, Dr. Mohit Bhasin diagnosed the Veteran with bicupsid aortic valve, which he described as congenital, and severe stenosis of the aortic valve. He found that the Veteran was born with bicupsid aortic valve, which gradually deterioriated due to age and lifestyle. He further found that the Veteran’s stenosis more likely than not manifested in the 1990 to 1997 time frame and that his valve most certainly deterioriated prior to the Veteran’s retirement in 1998. Dr. Bhasin’s findings indicate that the Veteran’s aortic valve stenosis may either be congenital or a pre-existing condition. As such, a VA examination is warranted to clarify whether the Veteran’s aortic valve stenosis is congenital or a pre-existing condition and obtain a new opinion. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Schedule a VA examination with a cardiologist. Provide the claims file, including a copy of this REMAND, to the examiner for review. After review of the claims file, the examiner should respond to the following: (a) Clarify whether the Veteran’s aortic valve stenosis is a congenital or developmental defect or disease. Please provide a complete explanation for the opinion. *For VA purposes, a congenital defect is a structural or inherent abnormality or condition which is more or less stationary in nature. For VA purposes, a congenital disease is a condition that is capable of improving or deteriorating. (b) If aortic valve stenosis is a congenital defect (a stationary condition), is it at least as likely as not that the Veteran suffers from additional disability due to aggravation of the defect during service because of a superimposed disease or injury. (c) If aortic valve stenosis is a congenital disease (a condition that is capable of improving or worsening), provide an opinion on whether it (i) clearly and unmistakably preexisted service, and if so, was it (ii) clearly and unmistakably not aggravated beyond the natural progress of the disorder during his service? In other words, please determine whether it is clear and unmistakable that there was no increase in disability during service or that it is clear and unmistakable that any increase in disability was due to the natural progress of the preexisting condition. (d) If either (b) or (c) is answered in the negative, offer an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (probability of at least 50 percent) that the Veteran’s aortic valve stenosis (or any currently diagnosed heart disability) had its onset or is otherwise etiologically related to his period of active service. The cardiologist should address the August 2018 Disability Benefits Questionnaire completed by Dr. Mohit Bhasin and February 2015 lay statement by the Veteran’s wife. (Continued on the next page)   A complete rationale for all conclusions must be clearly provided. LESLEY A. REIN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD E. Ko, Associate Counsel