Citation Nr: 21004752 Decision Date: 01/28/21 Archive Date: 01/28/21 DOCKET NO. 17-61 739 DATE: January 28, 2021 ORDER As the claim is withdrawn, the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain with herniated disc L3-4 and L4-L5 intervertebral disc syndrome prior to March 1, 2018, is dismissed. As the claim is withdrawn, the issue of entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for lumbosacral strain with herniated disc L3-L4 and L4-L5 intervertebral disc syndrome on or after March 1, 2018, is dismissed. FINDING OF FACT On November 24, 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received written notification from the Appellant (Veteran) that a withdrawal of the claims for entitlement to increased ratings (staged) for her service-connected lumbosacral spine disability, is requested. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for withdrawal by the Veteran of the claim for entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for lumbosacral strain with herniated disc L3-4 and L4-L5 intervertebral disc syndrome prior to March 1, 2018, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria for withdrawal by the Veteran of the claim for entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for lumbosacral strain with herniated disc L3-L4 and L4-L5 intervertebral disc syndrome on or after March 1, 2018, have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty from September 1996 to June 1998. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The procedural background is as follows. In a March 2015 rating decision, the RO decreased the evaluation of the Veteran’s lumbosacral spine disability to 20 percent disabling based on a VA examination that showed the Veteran’s low back disability had improved. The Veteran submitted a notice of disagreement (NOD) with that decision in February 2016. In a November 2017 Decision Review Officer (DRO) rating decision, the RO assigned a temporary 100 percent evaluation for lumbar spine surgery that necessitated convalescence effective from December 1, 2015 to March 1, 2016, reinstated a 20 percent evaluation at the expiration of the convalescence period effective from March 1, 2016, and contemporaneously issued a Statement of the Case (SOC). In a May 2018 rating decision, the RO granted another temporary 100 percent evaluation based on lumbar spine surgery that necessitated convalescence effective from December 1, 2017 to March 1, 2018 and then granted an increased 40 percent evaluation for the Veteran’s lumbosacral spine disability effective from March 1, 2018. The RO also issued a Supplemental Statement of the Case (SSOC) in May 2018 addressing the issues as characterized on the cover page of this decision. A November 2018 rating decision granted a 100 percent rating based on individual unemployability from July 10, 2018; special monthly compensation from July 10, 2018; and basis eligibility to Dependents’ Educational Assistance from July 10, 2018. A December 2018 VA letter notified the Veteran of this decision. It is noted that, although in her substantive appeal (VA Form 9) received in November 2017, the Veteran requested a travel board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ), in withdrawing this appeal, the Board hearing request is considered withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(e). 1. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 20 percent for the Veteran’s service-connected lumbosacral spine disability, prior to March 1, 2018, is dismissed. 2. Entitlement to an evaluation in excess of 40 percent for the Veteran’s service-connected lumbosacral spine disability, on or after March 1, 2018, is dismissed. Issues 1&2: 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. § 19.55. Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. Id. The withdrawal must include the name of the Veteran, the VA file number, and a statement that the appeal is withdrawn. Withdrawals are effective when received by the Board if a decision has not been promulgated. A withdrawal must be (1) explicit, (2) unambiguous, and (3) done with a full understanding of the consequences of such action by the appellant. Acree v. O'Rourke, 891 F.3d 1009, 1012 (Fed. Cir. 2018); DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45, 5758 (2011); 38 C.F.R. § 20.205. Here, in a written statement received by VA on November 24, 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Veteran notified the Board of her request to withdraw her appeal. See VA 21-4138 Statement in Support of Claim (November 2020). The withdrawal included the Veteran’s name, claims file number, and signature. The request is not unclear or ambiguous as it clearly reflects that the Veteran seeks to withdraw her appeal and VA records reflect that there is only one appeal stream pending before the Board which pertains to the evaluation of the Veteran’s service-connected lumbosacral spine disability. Hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration in these matters. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review these issues and they are dismissed. C.A. SKOW Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Krunic, 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.