Citation Nr: 21002687 Decision Date: 01/14/21 Archive Date: 01/14/21 DOCKET NO. 19-31 574 DATE: January 14, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the cervical and thoracic spine is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for hypertension is dismissed. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for lumbar sprain, with intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine is dismissed. Entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT In October 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeals, the Board received notification from the Veteran that a complete withdrawal of his pending appeals is requested. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the claim of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the cervical and thoracic spine, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 2. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the claim of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for hypertension, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 3. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the claim of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for lumbar sprain, with intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). 4. The criteria for withdrawal of the appeal of the claim of entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from January 1973 to November 1993. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an August 2015 rating decision by the RO. An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. Except for appeals withdrawn on the record at a hearing, appeal withdrawals must be in writing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(b). Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. “[W]ithdrawal of a claim is only effective where the withdrawal is explicit, unambiguous, and done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action on the part of the claimant.” DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 57 (2011). However, DeLisio specifically addressed the context of claims withdrawn during oral argument at a hearing, rather than in writing. DeLisio, 25 Vet. App. at 57-58; Acree v. O’Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009, 1014 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (providing that “DeLisio sets out the proper standard for determining whether a veteran has effectively withdrawn a claim at a [Board] hearing”). When withdrawing a claim in writing, the statement must identify the name of the veteran in question, the name of the claimant if one has been substituted on the veteran’s behalf, the applicable VA file number, and the claims to be withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(b)(1) (2019). In an October 2020 statement, the Veteran stated he wished to withdraw all pending issues on appeal. Specifically, the Veteran indicated he wished to withdraw his claims of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 10 percent for intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the cervical and thoracic spine, entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for hypertension, entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for lumbar sprain, with intervertebral disc syndrome with degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine, and entitlement to a compensable evaluation for bilateral hearing loss. That statement included the Veteran’s name and his claims file number. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and there remains no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration. K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Ashley Ki 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.