Citation Nr: 18157821
Decision Date: 12/13/18	Archive Date: 12/13/18

DOCKET NO. 16-63 275
DATE:	December 13, 2018
ORDER
The appeal seeking to reopen a claim for entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction is denied.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Veteran’s claim seeking entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction was initially denied in a February 2008 rating decision that became final.  A September 2013 rating decision continued that denial.  The Veteran did not appeal that decision or submit new and material evidence within one year; it became final.  
2. The evidence added to the record since the September 2013 rating decision does not relate to an unestablished fact that is necessary to substantiate the claim of entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
New and material evidence has not been received to reopen the claim of entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction.  38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156 (a).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
The Veteran served on active duty from January 1989 to March 2005.
Whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen a claim for entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction
The Veteran seeks to reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction.  The question before the Board is whether new and material evidence has been submitted to reopen the claim. 
The service connection claim was initially denied in a February 2008 rating decision because the evidence did not show that erectile dysfunction was related to the Veteran’s service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and there was no evidence of erectile dysfunction during military service.  The Veteran did not appeal that decision or submit new and material evidence within one year; it became final.
The Veteran filed a petition in March 2012 to reopen his service connection claim, which was denied in a September 2013 rating decision because the evidence continued to show that erectile dysfunction did not occur as a result of service or as secondary to his service-connected PTSD.   The Veteran did not appeal that decision or submit new and material evidence within one year; it became final.  The RO apparently reconsidered the Veteran’s petition in a September 2015 rating decision but again declined to reopen the service connection claim.
Evidence received since the September 2013 rating decision includes numerous VA and private treatment records.  The medical records were not in his claims file at the time of the last final rating decision, and therefore, the treatment records are new.  However, none of this recently submitted evidence establishes that the Veteran’s erectile dysfunction can be related either to his active duty military service or to his service-connected PTSD.  As such, the Board finds that these medical records are not material. 38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156; Shade v. Shinseki, 24 Vet. App. 110 (2010). 
Accordingly, the Board finds that new and material evidence has not been received to reopen the Veteran’s service connection claim for erectile dysfunction, and the appeal is denied.  38 U.S.C. § 5108; 38 C.F.R. § 3.156.
 
M.E. Larkin
Veterans Law Judge
Board of Veterans’ Appeals
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD	Jack S. Komperda, Counsel