DECISION DISMISSING CASE

On May 12, 2004, I directed that a letter be sent to the aggrieved party explaining that additional information was needed to clarify whether his letter of January 26, 2004 was intended as a complaint challenging a Local Coverage Determination (LCD). The letter informed him what information was required in order to file an acceptable complaint to challenge an LCD. The letter also stated that, if he failed to respond by June 1, 2004, I would assume that he did not wish to challenge an LCD and would dismiss this case. As of the date of this order, I have received no response from the aggrieved party.

Assuming the aggrieved party's January 26 letter was intended as an LCD complaint, it is unacceptable because it does not contain the information specified at 42 C.F.R. � 426.400(c)(4), (5), and (6). I have afforded him the opportunity to amend the complaint, as required by 42 C.F.R. � 426.410(c)(1). The aggrieved party has failed to submit an acceptable complaint within the timeframe I have established. Therefore, pursuant to 42 C.F.R. � 426.410(c)(2), I must issue a decision dismissing the complaint.

For the foregoing reasons, I determine that the aggrieved party has failed to file an acceptable complaint challenging an LCD. Accordingly, I decide that this case must be dismissed.

The aggrieved party has 30 days from the date of this Decision to file an appeal with the Departmental Appeals Board, in accordance with 42 C.F.R. � 426.465.