Citation Nr: 21031656 Decision Date: 05/24/21 Archive Date: 05/24/21 DOCKET NO. 16-22 736 DATE: May 24, 2021 REMANDED Service connection for compulsive eating disorder as secondary to service-connected major depressive disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is remanded. Service connection for diabetes mellitus type II as secondary to compulsive eating disorder is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from March 1992 to September 1994. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from an April 2016 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) in March 2020. Transcript of the hearing have been associated with the claims file. The claims were previously remanded by the Board in July 2020. At that time, the claim for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder was also remanded. In a January 2021 decision, the RO granted service connection for major depressive disorder and PTSD and initial rating was assigned. As this decision represents a full grant of the benefits sought with respect to this claim for service connection, such issue is no longer before the Board for consideration. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156 (Fed. Cir. 1977). 1. Service connection for compulsive eating disorder as secondary to service-connected major depressive disorder and PTSD is remanded. The Veteran asserts that he has an eating disorder as secondary to his now service-connected major depressive disorder and PTSD. During the March 2020 Board hearing, the Veteran testified that after incidents in Korea, he became depressed and that eating kind of made him happy for a bit. He stated with the depression, he just sits at home and eats. In an undated statement received in May 2020, the Veteran's treating counselor indicated that the Veteran has presented with symptoms including depression, obesity, and poor impulse control. He has consistently struggled with impulse control and compulsive eating, and that his compulsive eating (an identified negative coping skill) is linked to his lack of self-worth/control reportedly starting around his reported military sexual trauma (MST). The December 2020 VA examination did not address the Veteran's claimed eating disorder. It is unclear whether the Veteran has a separate diagnosable eating disorder which is due to his service-connected major depressive disorder or whether his eating problems are a symptom of his major depressive disorder, like poor impulse control. As such, the Board finds an examination and opinion is necessary to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed eating disorder. 2. Service connection for diabetes mellitus type II as secondary to compulsive eating disorder or service-connected major depressive disorder and PTSD is remanded. The Veteran asserts he has diabetes mellitus as a result of his eating disorder. As the Veteran asserts his eating disorder is the result of his service-connected major depressive disorder, the Board finds an additional opinion is necessary to determine if the Veteran's diabetes mellitus is caused or aggravated by his service-connected major depressive disorder. The matters are 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 claims 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 their 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. Following the receipt of outstanding records, schedule the Veteran for an appropriate examination to determine the nature and etiology of any compulsive eating disorder and/or diabetes mellitus. The Veteran's claims file and a copy of this remand should be furnished to the examiner. The examiner should indicate in the examination report that he or she has reviewed the claims file. The need for in-person physical examination is left to the discretion of the examiner. The examiner is asked to provide an opinion as to whether the Veteran has a diagnosis of an eating disorder such as compulsive eating disorder that is separate and distinct from his service-connected major depressive disorder with PTSD. If so, is the Veteran's diagnosed eating disorder at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) proximately due to or aggravated by his service-connected major depressive disorder with PTSD? If the Veteran has a diagnosed eating disorder that is caused or aggravated by his service-connected major depressive disorder with PTSD, is his diabetes mellitus proximately due to or aggravated by his eating disorder and/or major depressive disorder with PTSD? (Continued on the next page) The examiner is reminded that the Veteran is considered competent to have reported the events that occurred during service, as well as the symptoms that he experienced, including when those symptoms had their onset and how long they have persisted. The Veteran's contentions regarding onset and continuity of symptoms must be considered and weighed when making the etiology opinion. The examiner must set forth a complete rationale for any conclusion reached, citing to medical literature and/or evidence in the Veteran's claims file as necessary. If an opinion cannot be reached without resorting to speculation, the examiner must fully explain why. KRISTY L. ZADORA Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. M. Donahue Boushehri, 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.