Citation Nr: 21031586 Decision Date: 05/24/21 Archive Date: 05/24/21 DOCKET NO. 13-16 392 DATE: May 24, 2021 ORDER The appeal for an increased rating greater than 50 percent for depression with anxiety, prior to September 24, 2014, is withdrawn and dismissed. The appeal for an increased rating greater than 70 percent for depression with anxiety, on and after September 24, 2014, is withdrawn and dismissed. FINDING OF FACT On August 12, 2020, prior to the promulgation of a decision in the appeal, the Board received notification from the appellant that a withdrawal of this appeal is requested. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria have been met for withdrawal of an appeal by the appellant for the issue of an increased rating greater than 50 percent for depression with anxiety, prior to September 24, 2014. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. 2. The criteria have been met for withdrawal of an appeal by the appellant for the issue of an increased rating greater than 70 percent for depression with anxiety, on and after September 24, 2014. 38 U.S.C. § 7105; 38 C.F.R. § 19.55. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The appellant served on active duty from October 1966 to September 1968 in the U.S. Army. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from January 2011 and March 2015 rating decisions issued by an Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). This appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket. 38 U.S.C. § 7107(b) (effective February 19, 2019); 38 C.F.R. § 20.800(c) (2020). In August 2014, the Board remanded the appeal for further development. This case has since been returned to the Board for appellate review, after the AOJ substantially complied with the Board's remand order. Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998). In May 2014, the appellant and his spouse testified at a Travel Board hearing before a Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) who has since retired from the Board. In any event, a June 2014 letter from the Board to the appellant advised that due to "technical difficulties" VA was unable to produce a written transcript of the above May 2014 Travel Board hearing. On this issue, VA regulation states that in the event a Board hearing has not been recorded in whole or in part due to equipment failure or other cause, or the official transcript of the hearing is lost or destroyed and the recording upon which it was based is no longer available, the Board must notify the appellant and his or her representative in writing that the appellant may request another hearing. 38 C.F.R. § 20.715 (2020) (formerly 38 C.F.R. § 20.717 (2018)). Thus, in light of this regulation, in June 2014 correspondence, the Board offered the appellant the opportunity to testify at another hearing pursuant to § 20.715(a)(1)(i). In a June 2014 response, the appellant requested a new Travel Board hearing before a VLJ. In October 2015 correspondence from VA, the appellant was advised that a new Travel Board hearing was scheduled for December 2015. However, the appellant failed to report for the scheduled hearing in December 2015. He has not explained his absence or requested to reschedule the hearing. Therefore, the Board hearing request is considered withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(d) (2020). Dismissal of Appeal 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 (2020) (formerly 38 C.F.R. § 20.204 (2018)). Withdrawal may be made by the appellant or by his or her authorized representative. 38 C.F.R. § 19.55(a). In an August 12, 2020 email from the appellant, the appellant expressed his desire to withdraw the present increased rating appeal. In an accompanying August 2020 cover letter, the appellant's representative confirmed his intention to withdraw the appeal. The appellant's withdrawal of the present appeal complies with VA's requirements for withdrawal discussed under the provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 19.55(a)-(b). In the present case, the appellant has withdrawn the above issues on appeal and, hence, there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law for appellate consideration for these issues. Accordingly, the Board does not have jurisdiction to review the appeal for these issues. It follows that they are dismissed. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board P.S. Rubin, 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.