Citation Nr: 18145186 Decision Date: 10/26/18 Archive Date: 10/26/18 DOCKET NO. 16-31 406 DATE: October 26, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to an initial compensable disability rating for erectile dysfunction associated with prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran does not have penile deformity. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for an initial compensable rating for erectile dysfunction associated with prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 4.115b, Diagnostic Codes 7599-7522 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service from December 1966 to December 1970. This case comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (the Board) on appeal from a June 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Higher evaluation for erectile dysfunction Disability ratings are assigned in accordance with the VA’s Schedule for Rating Disabilities and are intended to represent the average impairment of earning capacity resulting from disability. See 38 U.S.C. § 1155 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.321(a), 4.1 (2017). Separate diagnostic codes identify the various disabilities. See 38 C.F.R. Part 4 (2017). Where there is a question as to which of two evaluations shall be applied, the higher evaluation will be assigned if the disability picture more nearly approximates the criteria required for that rating. Otherwise, the lower rating will be assigned. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.7 (2017). “Staged” ratings are appropriate for any rating claim when the factual findings show distinct time periods where the service-connected disability exhibits symptoms that would warrant different ratings. See Hart v. Mansfield, 21 Vet. App. 505 (2007); Fenderson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 119 (1999). The Veteran was granted service connection for erectile dysfunction associated with prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy and a noncompensable rating was thereto assigned pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 4.115b, Diagnostic Codes 7599-7522. There is no diagnostic code which deals with erectile dysfunction exclusively. Diagnostic Code 7522 concerns penis deformity, with loss of erectile power. Under Diagnostic Code 7522, a 20 percent rating is assigned for deformity of the penis with loss of erectile power. No other disability rating is provided. See 38 C.F.R. § 4.115b, Diagnostic Code 7522. In every instance where the minimum schedular evaluation requires residuals and the schedule does not provide for a zero percent rating, a zero percent rating will be assigned when the required symptomatology is not shown. 38 C.F.R. § 4.31 (2017). The Veteran is seeking a compensable rating for his service-connected erectile dysfunction associated with prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy. The Board observes that, during the pendency of this appeal, the Veteran was granted special monthly compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1114(k) due to loss of use of a creative organ. In order for a compensable rating to be assigned under Diagnostic Code 7522, deformity of the penis must be demonstrated. In this regard, the Veteran was afforded VA genitourinary examinations in July 2012 and June 2014. Notably, the Veteran declined a genitourinary system examination for the July 2012 examination and declined examination of his penis, testes, epididymis, and prostate during the June 2014 examination. As such, the VA examiners were unable to determine whether the Veteran had a penile deformity. In any event, the remainder of medical evidence is absent any finding of penile deformity, and the Veteran does not contend that he has such. Further, if the Veteran contended that he has a penile deformity, the Board notes that he was afforded VA genitourinary examinations but in particular declined examination of his penis, testes, epididymis, and prostate in June 2014. See Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190. 192 (1991) (“the duty to assist is not always a one-way street. If a veteran wishes help, he cannot passively wait for it in those circumstances where he may or should have information that is essential in obtaining the putative evidence”). The Board ’s decision to not remand the appeal to obtain another VA examination to determine whether the Veteran has a penile deformity is supported by the fact that the AOJ made a sufficient attempt to obtain such information. Therefore, the evidence does not show and the Veteran does not otherwise assert that he experiences penile deformity. For the reasons stated above, the preponderance of the evidence is against an initial compensable rating for the Veteran’s erectile dysfunction associated with prostate cancer, status post prostatectomy. Thus, the benefit-of-the doubt doctrine does not apply, and the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 4.3. With regard to extraschedular consideration, the Veteran has not raised any issue pertaining to this matter, nor have any other issues pertaining to extraschedular consideration been reasonably raised by the record. See Doucette v. Shulkin, 28 Vet. Ap. 366, 369-70 (2017) (confirming that the Board is not required to address issues unless they are specifically raised by the claimant or reasonably raised by the evidence of record). Biswajit Chatterjee Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Arif Syed, Counsel