Citation Nr: 18147021
Decision Date: 11/02/18	Archive Date: 11/02/18

DOCKET NO. 16-59 591
DATE:	November 2, 2018
ORDER
Entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for a right knee condition is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder condition is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder condition is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for a ganglion cyst of the left wrist is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for a ganglion cyst of the right wrist is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for an acute allergic reaction to IVP dye and iodine is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for right cubital tunnel syndrome is dismissed.
Entitlement to service connection for numbness of the left lower extremity is dismissed.
Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for lumbar degenerative disc disease is dismissed.
Entitlement to an increased disability rating for tinea pedis is dismissed.
Whether the Veteran's character of discharge for the period of service from February 22, 1986 to January 6, 2009 is a bar to the receipt of VA benefits is dismissed.
FINDING OF FACT
In January 2017, the Veteran specifically withdrew his appeal.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The criteria for withdrawal of an appeal by the Veteran of the issues of entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition, right knee condition, left shoulder condition, right shoulder condition, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, ganglion cyst of the left wrist, ganglion cyst of the right wrist, an acute allergic reaction to IVP dye and iodine, diabetes mellitus type II, right cubital tunnel syndrome, numbness of the left lower extremity; entitlement to an increased disability rating for lumbar degenerative disc disease and tinea pedis; and whether the Veteran’s character of discharge for the period of service from February 22, 1986 to January 6, 2009 is a bar to the receipt of VA benefits have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 20.204.
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran had active service from June 1973 to January 2009. For a portion of this active duty the Veteran received an other than honorable discharge. 
1. Entitlement to service connection for a left knee condition
2. Entitlement to service connection for a right knee condition
3. Entitlement to service connection for a left shoulder condition
4. Entitlement to service connection for a right shoulder condition
5. Entitlement to service connection for bilateral hearing loss
6. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus
7. Entitlement to service connection for a ganglion cyst of the left wrist
8. Entitlement to service connection for a ganglion cyst of the right wrist
9. Entitlement to service connection for an acute allergic reaction to IVP dye and iodine
10. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type 2
11. Entitlement to service connection for right cubital tunnel syndrome
12. Entitlement to service connection for numbness of the left lower extremity
13. Entitlement to an increased disability evaluation for lumbar degenerative disc disease
14. Entitlement to an increased disability rating for tinea pedis
15. Whether the Veteran's character of discharge for the period of service from February 22, 1986 to January 6, 2009 is a bar to the receipt of VA benefits
Under 38 U.S.C. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the determination being appealed. An appeal may be withdrawn in writing or in testimony at a hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. In this case, the Veteran, through a January 2017 VA Form 9, withdrew his entire appeal. Therefore, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration as it relates to these claims. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal as to these issues, and they are dismissed without prejudice.
 
JENNIFER HWA
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	K. Parke