Citation Nr: 21069924 Decision Date: 11/22/21 Archive Date: 11/22/21 DOCKET NO. 19-33 970 DATE: November 22, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to a rating in excess of 20 percent for diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction and diabetic retinopathy and cataracts, to include as on an extraschedular basis, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 1967 to September 1970, and from February 2003 to February 2004. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2019 rating decision issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). Jurisdiction of this appeal is currently with the RO in Nashville, Tennessee. In his November 2019 substantive appeal, the Veteran requested a videoconference hearing. He withdrew this request for a hearing in October 2021. Therefore, the Veteran's request for a Board hearing is considered withdrawn. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.702(e); 20.704(e). Increased Rating Diabetes Mellitus with Erectile Dysfunction and Diabetic Retinopathy and Cataracts The Veteran was most recently afforded an examination for diabetes mellitus, erectile dysfunction, and an eye examination in August 2018. Additionally, a VA addendum opinion as to visual acuity was provided in October 2019. In his November 2019 VA Form 9 and October 2021 Appellate Brief, it was indicated that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus and diabetic retinopathy and cataracts had worsened since his VA examinations. Specifically, the Veteran indicated that his diabetes mellitus now required regulation of his diet and exercise. See VA Form 9, November 8, 2019. In addition, his representative asserted that his diabetes mellitus required multiple doses of daily insulin, required a restricted diet, other nonservice-connected complications related to his diabetes mellitus, and indicated may warrant an extraschedular rating. As the above evidence indicates a possible worsening of that the Veteran's diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction and diabetic retinopathy and cataracts since his last VA examinations, additional examinations should be afforded to gauge the current level of severity of his disability. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The Veteran should be given the opportunity to identify any outstanding private or VA treatment records relevant to the claim on appeal. After obtaining any necessary authorization from the Veteran, all outstanding records should be obtained, to include updated VA treatment records. For private treatment records, make at least two (2) attempts to obtain records from any identified sources. If any such records are unavailable, inform the Veteran and his representative and afford him an opportunity to submit any copies in his possession. For federal records, all reasonable attempts should be made to obtain such records. If any records cannot be obtained after reasonable efforts have been made, issue a formal determination that such records do not exist or that further efforts to obtain such records would be futile, which should be documented in the claims file. The Veteran must be notified of the attempts made and why further attempts would be futile, and allowed the opportunity to provide such records, as provided in 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(b)(2) and 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 2. Then, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination(s) with an appropriately qualified clinician(s) to determine the current nature and severity of his service-connected diabetes mellitus, erectile dysfunction, and diabetic retinopathy and cataracts. The record, to include a copy of this Remand, should be made available to the examiner, and all indicated tests should be conducted. The examiner(s) should identify the nature and severity of all current manifestations of the Veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus, erectile dysfunction, and diabetic retinopathy and cataracts. A rationale for any opinion offered should be provided. KRISTY L. ZADORA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board Mariah N. Sim, Counsel 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.