Citation Nr: 1322748 Decision Date: 07/17/13 Archive Date: 07/24/13 DOCKET NO. 10-17 020 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Detroit, Michigan THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: The American Legion WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K. Hudson, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran had active service from August 1967 to September 1969. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a regional office (RO) rating decision of August 2009. In July 2010, the appellant appeared at a Board videoconference hearing held before the undersigned. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required on his part. REMAND Although the Veteran submitted additional evidence, pursuant to discussion at his July 2010 Board hearing, accompanied by a waiver of RO consideration, unfortunately, a review of the file discloses additional development must be undertaken prior to final appellate review. First, it appears as if the Veteran's service treatment records and, possibly, original service personnel records may have been misplaced or lost. The file shows that the Veteran's service treatment records as well as certain personnel records, including those showing unit and dates of assignment, were requested in November 2008. The first indication that such records had been received was in a May 2009 rating decision, located in the Veteran's Virtual VA file, which contains a list of evidence including service treatment records from August 15, 1967, to September 15, 1969. The August 2009 rating decision included a list of evidence, including "personnel extracts and records," and "service treatment records from November 17, 1966, through August 13, 1969." The last mention of these records was in the March 2010 statement of the case. However, in the local representative's remarks, presented on VA Form 646, in May 2010, the representative stated that the service treatment records did not appear to be in the claims file. There are no service treatment records currently in the claims file, and the only personnel records are copies submitted by the Veteran in December 2009. The RO must make all necessary efforts to locate the service treatment records and personnel records, to include contacting National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). Next, the Veteran claims that he developed type II diabetes mellitus due to in-service exposure to Agent Orange, and he has been diagnosed as having type II diabetes mellitus. He testified that he flew through Vietnam, but he said this was on a commercial flight, which VA would not be able to corroborate through official channels. He also alleges that he was exposed to herbicides during his active military service when he was deployed to Korat, Thailand. Available personnel records show that the Veteran was assigned to Thailand from June 1968 to June 1969. He testified that Agent Orange was sprayed outside the "hooch's" at night to kill vegetation around the barracks, and that he handled drums of Agent Orange, which were stored in and outside the warehouses where he worked. His occupational specialties during the time he was deployed to Thailand were Vehicle Repairman Apprentice and Construction and Utility Worker. There is no legal presumption of exposure to Agent Orange for veterans deployed to Thailand, but VA has developed specific procedures for verification, on a facts found basis, of whether an individual veteran was exposed to herbicides in Thailand. The claims file does not reflect that these procedures, set forth in VA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, See M21-1MR Prt. IV, subpart ii, ch. 2, § C ¶ 10(q), were undertaken. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Make all necessary efforts to locate the Veteran's service treatment records and service personnel records, requested in November 2008, referred to as in the claims file in a May 2009 rating decision (in Virtual VA), and noted to be missing in a May 2010 VA Form 646. This should include contacting the NPRC, unless the records are located locally. All efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that further attempts would be futile, and this should be documented for the record. 2. Provide the Veteran with a copy of the Memorandum for the Record concerning Herbicide use in Thailand during the Vietnam Era, set forth in M21-1MR Prt. IV, subpart ii, ch. 2, § C ¶ 10(r). 3. Develop the claim according to M21-1MR Prt. IV, subpart ii, ch. 2, § C ¶ 10(q), with respect to the Veteran's claim of exposure to herbicides while stationed in Thailand. 4. After the above has been completed, review the claims file and ensure that all of the foregoing development actions have been conducted and completed in full. If any development is incomplete, appropriate corrective action is to be implemented. Then, readjudicate the Veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II. If the claim remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be provided a supplemental statement of the case that addresses all evidence received since issuance of the March 2010 Statement of the Case. An appropriate period of time should be allowed for response, before the file is returned to the Board. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012). _________________________________________________ BARBARA B. COPELAND Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).