Citation Nr: 0812931 Decision Date: 04/18/08 Archive Date: 05/01/08 DOCKET NO. 06-26 414 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Nashville, Tennessee THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for impotence. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: American Red Cross ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Nicole Klassen, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from October 1970 to April 1972. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a December 2005 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Nashville, Tennessee, which denied the above claim. A review of the record indicates that, in August 2005, the veteran asked that a claim for service connection for carpal tunnel syndrome and high cholesterol be adjudicated. There is no indication in the claims folder that these claims were adjudicated. This matter is referred to the RO for appropriate action. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required. REMAND The veteran contends that he is impotent and that his impotence is caused by or related to his time in service; or, in the alternative, he contends that his impotence is secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus The medical evidence shows that VA has prescribed Viagra to treat the veteran's erectile dysfunction. There is no medical evidence, however, addressing whether his erectile dysfunction is due, at least in part, to his service- connected diabetes mellitus. A medical opinion is thus necessary to make a determination in this case, see 38 U.S.C.A. § 5103A(d)(2), and it is incumbent on the Board to remand this matter to supplement the record prior to adjudicating the claim. See Wallin v. West, 11 Vet. App. 509, 513 (1998); Colvin v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 171, 175 (1991); see also Mariano v. Principi, 17 Vet. App. 305, 312 (2003). Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Make arrangements to obtain a complete copy of the veteran's treatment records for depression from the Memphis VA Medical Center, dated since August 2005. 2. Schedule the veteran for a VA examination. The claims file should be made available to and reviewed by the examiner. All necessary tests should be conducted. The examiner should state if the veteran is impotent. If impotence is diagnosed, the examiner should opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the veteran's impotence had its onset during active service or is related to any in-service disease or injury. The examiner must also opine whether it is at least as likely as not that the veteran's impotence was caused by or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus. The examiner should provide a rationale for all conclusions in a legible report. 3. Readjudicate the appeal. If the claim remains denied, provide the veteran with a supplemental statement of the case and allow an appropriate time for response. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ STEVEN D. REISS Acting Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).