Citation Nr: 21040876 Decision Date: 07/07/21 Archive Date: 07/07/21 DOCKET NO. 18-06 065A DATE: July 7, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for traumatic heart disease, myocardial fibrosis with RFB, and lingual of left upper heart lobe is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for residuals of lung injury is remanded. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for scars, superficial is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from January 1967 to February 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from February 2016 and June 2016 rating decisions by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge during an October 2019 hearing. A transcript of the hearing is associated with the Veteran's claim file. This appeal has been advanced on docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.900(c) (2017). 38 U.S.C. §§ 7107(a)(2). This matter was previously before the Board in January 2020 and February 2021. The matter has returned to the Board for adjudication. 1. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for traumatic heart disease, myocardial fibrosis with RFB, and lingual of left upper heart lobe 2. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 20 percent for residuals of lung injury 3. Entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 10 percent for scars, superficial In October 2020, the RO issued a supplement statement of the case (SSOC), that denied a rating in excess of 30 percent for the service-connected heart condition, denied an excess of 20 percent for service-connected residuals of a lung injury, and denied an excess of 10 percent for service-connected superficial scars. The SSOC also increased the Veteran's mental health condition to 50 percent disabling effective October 19, 2015 and assigned a 70 percent evaluation from January 10, 2020. Upon review of the claims file, in December 2020, it appears that the Veteran submitted an Appeals Satisfaction Notice indicating that based on the decision rendered, he is satisfied and wishes to withdraw all remaining issues associated with the appeal. The form also stated by signing and submitting this form, he is asking to withdraw all remaining issue(s) contained in the recent SSOC and is asking the regional office of jurisdiction to discontinue further development actions associated with the appeal. The form emphasized that if he was returning the document, he no longer wants to pursue the remaining items contained in the SSOC. The Board issued a decision in February 2021 that denied entitlement to an initial disability rating in excess of 50 percent from October 19, 2015 to January 9, 2020 and in excess of 70 percent from January 10, 2020 for unspecified trauma-related and stressor-related disorder. The Board also remanded the issues for increased ratings for the service-connected heart condition, lung condition, and scars. However, it is unclear as to when the Appeals Satisfaction Notice was associated with the Veteran's claims file as the Board had issued a decision as previously noted in February 2021. Had the Appeals Satisfaction Notice been associated with the file, the issues on appeal would have been withdrawn by the Board at that time. As such, the Board must remand the claim to clarify with the Veteran his intentions regarding the issues on appeal. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and/or his representative and clarify whether the Veteran still wishes to withdraw his claims on appeal regarding increased ratings for the service-connected heart condition, lung condition, and scars. Inform the Veteran and/or his representative if the claims are to be withdrawn, it must be done so in writing. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board E. Kim, Associate 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.