Citation Nr: 20008065 Decision Date: 01/30/20 Archive Date: 01/30/20 DOCKET NO. 16-37 202 DATE: January 30, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from October 1985 to January 1992. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2015 rating decision issued by a Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). In an October 2018 decision, the Board denied the Veteran’s application to reopen a previously denied claim for service connection for diabetes mellitus, and his claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction. He appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In May 2019, pursuant to a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (Joint Motion), the Court vacated the portion of the Board’s decision that denied service connection for erectile dysfunction. In July 2019, the Veteran appointed an attorney, K.P., as his representative. In September 2019, the attorney indicated that he was withdrawing representation. Although this issue had been certified to the Board, the attorney did not agree to act as representative in the appeal prior to certification. Therefore, a motion for good cause to withdraw is not required, and the Board accepts the attorney’s request to withdraw as the Veteran’s representative. 38 C.F.R. §§ 14.631(b), 20.608(b). The Veteran was notified of the withdrawal and has not appointed another representative. Therefore, the Board recognizes the Veteran as proceeding pro se in this matter. The Board notes that additional development is required before the issue on appeal is decided. In the Joint Motion, the parties agreed that the VA medical opinion, upon which the Board relied, did not adequately address the Veteran’s contention that his service-connected hypertension aggravated his erectile dysfunction. Therefore, a remand is necessary for an additional VA medical opinion. Additionally, current treatment records should be identified and obtained before a decision is made with regard to the issue on appeal. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Identify and obtain any pertinent, outstanding VA and private treatment records and associate them with the claims file. 2. Then, return the case to the VA examiner who conducted the July 2016 examination for an addendum opinion. After a review of the evidence of record, to include consideration of the newly received records, as well as the Veteran’s lay statements, the VA examiner should provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or greater) that any erectile dysfunction is aggravated by the Veteran’s service-connected hypertension. In rendering this opinion, the VA examiner should address the Veteran’s contention that his hypertension impairs blood flow thereby aggravating his erectile dysfunction. A rationale for all opinions expressed must be provided. If the July 2016 VA examiner is unavailable, the claims file should be forwarded to an examiner with appropriate expertise to provide the requested opinion. A VA examination should only be performed if determined necessary by the examiner providing the requested opinion. 3. Confirm that the VA examination report and all opinions provided comport with this remand and undertake any other development found to be warranted. 4. Then, readjudicate the issue on appeal. If a decision is adverse to the Veteran, issue a supplemental statement of the case and allow appropriate time for response. Then, return the case to the Board. Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S. Mishalanie 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.