Citation Nr: 20021633 Decision Date: 03/26/20 Archive Date: 03/26/20 DOCKET NO. 08-00 908 DATE: March 26, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to an extraschedular rating for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is dismissed. Entitlement to an extraschedular total disability rating based on individual unemployability (TDIU) prior to August 18, 2008, is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In a signed July 2018 VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim, the Veteran requested to withdraw his claims on appeal. The form included the Veteran’s name and VA file number. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for a withdrawal of the Veteran’s substantive appeal have been met as to his claim of entitlement to an extraschedular rating for PTSD. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.200, 20.202, 20.204. 2. The criteria for a withdrawal of the Veteran’s substantive appeal have been met as to his claim of entitlement to an extraschedular total disability rating for a TDIU prior to August 18, 2008. 38 U.S.C. § 7105(b)(2), (d)(5); 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.200, 20.202, 20.204. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from November 1967 to January 1971. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office (RO). By way of history, a September 2006 rating decision denied service connection for PTSD, neck injury, residuals of fractured nose and entitlement to a compensable rating for hearing loss. The Veteran filed a timely notice of disagreement (NOD) in October 2006 with regard to only the service connection claims for PTSD, neck and residuals of fractured nose. Following issuance of a statement of the case (SOC) in November 2007, the Veteran perfected his appeal to the Board in December 2007. Prior to the case being certified to the Board, a DRO hearing was held in April 2009. Thereafter, a June 2009 rating decision granted service connection for PTSD and assigned an initial 10 percent evaluation prior to August 18, 2008, and a 30 percent evaluation thereafter. The Veteran filed a NOD in August 2009 with regard to his assigned PTSD ratings. A SOC was issued in December 2009 and the Veteran perfected his appeal in January 2010. Another DRO hearing was held in March 2010. After the case was certified to the Board, a Travel Board hearing was held in March 2013 before Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) P. Sorisio during which the Veteran provided testimony with regard to his service connection claims for neck injury and residuals of nasal fracture, and his increased rating claim for PTSD. A copy of the transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. Thereafter, an August 2013 Board decision remanded the service connection claims for residuals of nasal fracture and neck disorder, the increased rating claim for the service-connected PTSD, an earlier effective date claim for the grant of service connection for PTSD, and entitlement to a TDIU. Another DRO hearing was held in September 2014 with regard to the earlier effective date claim for PTSD. A March 2015 rating decision granted entitlement to a TDIU effective September 30, 2010. The March 2015 rating decision additionally found no clear and unmistakable error (CUE) in an earlier July 2003 rating decision resulting from a June 2003 line of duty (LOD) determination. With regard to the CUE claim, the Veteran filed a NOD in April and May 2015, a SOC was issued in July 2015, and the Veteran perfected his appeal to the Board in July 2015. In July 2015, the Veteran testified at a Travel Board hearing before the undersigned during which testimony was provided with regard to entitlement to an increased rating for PTSD, entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD, entitlement to service connection for neck injury, and whether there was CUE in a July 2003 rating decision resulting from a June 2003 LOD determination. A copy of the transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. A May 2016 Board decision dismissed the Veteran’s CUE claim on the basis that the July 2003 rating decision was not final as additional service treatment records that were not of record at the time of the prior rating decision had been recently added to the claims file. Additionally, a May 2016 Board panel decision granted increased ratings for PTSD, denied entitlement to an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD, and remanded the service connection claims for nasal and neck disorders. The decision additionally remanded the issue of entitlement to a TDIU prior to September 30, 2010, and the raised issue of an extraschedular rating for PTSD. The Veteran filed a Motion for Reconsideration in August 2016 which was denied in a December 2016 Board letter. A July 2017 rating decision granted an earlier effective date of August 18, 2008, for the grant of entitlement to a TDIU. In an October 2017 letter, the Veteran requested another Board hearing. That hearing was held in March 2018 before a VLJ Copeland. A transcript of that hearing has been associated with the claims file. A July 2018 Board Panel Decision denied service connection for a nasal and neck disorder. In addition, the issues of extraschedular consideration for PTSD and TDIU were remanded to determine whether referral of those issues was warranted. Withdraw of Appeal A substantive appeal may be withdrawn in writing at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204(b). Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(c). Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at a hearing, appeal withdrawals must be in writing and meet certain requirements set forth by regulation. They must include the name of the appellant, the applicable file number, and a statement that the appeal is being withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(b)(1). In a July 2018 VA Form 21-4138, Statement in Support of Claim, the Veteran stated that he was repealing his appeal with regard to extraschedular consideration for PTSD and TDIU which were remanded in the July 2018 Board Panel Decision. The form included the Veteran’s name and file number. Additionally, an August 2019 VA Form 119, Report of Contact, shows that the Board contacted the Veteran in order to verify his request for documents. The form also notes that the Veteran inquired about his appeals presently before the Board. With regard to the PTSD and TDIU issues, the Veteran stated that he was under the impression those issues had been completed that the he was no longer pursuing them. (Continued on the next page)   The Board accordingly finds that the Veteran’s request to withdraw his claims for extraschedular consideration for PTSD and TDIU qualifies as a valid withdrawal. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Accordingly, there remain no allegations of error of fact or law for appellate consideration as to those issues and they are dismissed. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Lamb, 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.