Citation Nr: 21069004
Decision Date: 11/17/21	Archive Date: 11/17/21

DOCKET NO. 17-46 662
DATE: November 17, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is dismissed.

FINDING OF FACT

Prior to promulgation of a decision by the Board, the Veteran relayed his intent to withdraw his claim of entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for PTSD.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for dismissal of entitlement to a disability rating higher than 30 percent for PTSD are met. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.204, 20.205.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from January 1966 to March 1969. This appeal is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an August 2016 rating decision from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).

The Veteran's claim was previously remanded by the Board on March 2, 2020 to afford the Veteran a VA examination as to the current nature of his PTSD. On March 16, 2020 he received the examination and thus, the Board finds substantial compliance with the remand directives. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268 (1998).

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(d). An appeal may be withdrawn as to any or all issues involved in the appeal at any time before the Board promulgates a decision. 38 C.F.R. § 20.205(a). Withdrawal may be made by a veteran or by his or her authorized representative. Id. 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 (Fed. Cir. 2018).

In this case, subsequent to the May 2020 Board remand, the RO in a July 2020 rating decision granted a 30 percent disability rating for the Veteran's PTSD effective March 16, 2020. In August 2020, the Veteran submitted an Appeals Satisfaction Notice to the Board indicating he no longer wanted to pursue his increased rating claim and was thus satisfied with his rating. Then, the Veteran's representative subsequently submitted an August 2021 Informal Hearing Presentation (IHP) indicating the Veteran wished to pursue his increased rating claim. However, in November 2021 the Veteran's representative submitted an IHP indicating the August 2020 IHP was "done in error and overlooked the prior withdrawal of his appeal." See November 4, 2021 IHP. 

In view of these circumstances and the Veteran's documented acknowledgement that he is satisfied with his 30 percent rating, clear intent to withdraw his appeal with an understanding of the ramifications thereof (as explained on his submitted August 2020 Appeals Satisfaction Notice), has been demonstrated. Given the Veteran's satisfaction with the RO's determination and his intent to withdraw his appeal, further action by the Board on this issue would not be appropriate. 38 U.S.C. § 7105. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed.

						[SIGNATURE ON NEXT PAGE]

 

JONATHAN B. KRAMER

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Law Clerk, Tyler R. Masters

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.