Citation Nr: 22017567 Decision Date: 03/25/22 Archive Date: 03/25/22 DOCKET NO. 16-07 016 DATE: March 25, 2022 REMANDED Whether the change in the Veteran's Means Test eligibility category from copay exempt to copay required for income year 2013 was proper, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty from June 1960 to June 1963. The issue is on appeal before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a February 2015 notification letter from the Health Eligibility Center (HEC) in Atlanta, Georgia, denying the Veteran's claim. A March 2022 Report of General Information in the Veterans' Appeals Control and Locator System (VACOLS) documents a telephone call where the Veteran expressed his choice to withdraw a request for a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge. He also requested to withdraw the claim on appeal. However, an effective claim withdrawal requires either a written and signed withdrawal request or a statement on the record at a Board hearing. As the statement given over telephone in March 2022 did not satisfy these requirements, this claim has not been withdrawn. Income Verification Match (IVM) is a secure procedure by which VA may obtain income information from the Social Security Administration and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in order to verify income amounts that are reported to VA. The adjudication of this matter involves information provided by the IRS and Social Security Administration for 2013. However, to avoid disclosure of sensitive information, the Board's decision does not directly cite dollar amounts included in any IVM report that has not been verified by the Veteran. Therefore, the text of this decision is not subject to the additional protections required under the IVM procedures. Whether the change in the Veteran's Means Test eligibility category from copay exempt to copay required for income year 2013 was proper, is remanded. VA shall furnish hospital care and medical services to any veteran who is unable to defray the expenses of necessary care. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1710(a)(2)(G). For the purposes of 38 U.S.C. § 1710(a)(2)(G), a veteran shall be considered to be unable to defray the expenses of necessary care if his attributable income is not greater than a specified income threshold, which is updated annually. 38 U.S.C. § 1722(a)-(c). If a veteran does not qualify under 38 U.S.C. § 1710(a)(2)(G), he or she will be responsible for a copayment for VA healthcare services that relate to nonservice-connected disabilities. The summary of evidence in the December 2015 statement of the case (SOC) includes in the list of evidence that on April 28, 2015, a HEC Form 200-1A with Option 2 selected, Providing Evidence of Deductible Expenses, HEC Form 200-1, SSA-1099s, 1099-Rs, 1099-G, and W2 for Income Year 2013 was received by the HEC. The record does not contain these documents. These missing documents must be associated with the claims file before the claim is decided on the merits. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the Veteran and inquire whether he wishes to withdraw his claim on whether the change in the Veteran's Means Test eligibility category from copay exempt to copay required for income year 2013 was proper. If he does, explain the requirements for an effective withdrawal in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 20.204. 2. If the Veteran does not effectively withdraw his claim, associate with the claims file the documents submitted by the Veteran including his HEC Form 200-1A with Option 2 selected, Providing Evidence of Deductible Expenses, HEC Form 200-1, SSA-1099s, 1099-Rs, 1099-G, and W2 for Income Year 2013. 3. If these documents are unavailable and further attempts to obtain these records would be futile, the HEC must note such unavailability in a Memorandum of Unavailability and associate it with the claims file. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Lee 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.