Citation Nr: 1329823 Decision Date: 09/18/13 Archive Date: 09/25/13 DOCKET NO. 10-12 130 ) DATE ) ) Received from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Reno, Nevada THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus (DM), Type II, to include as due to claimed inservice exposure to herbicides. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD J. Connolly, Counsel INTRODUCTION The Veteran served on active duty from August 1960 to August 1963. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a November 2008 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Louis, Missouri. The case was later transferred to the Reno, Nevada RO. 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. REMAND Unfortunately, a remand is required in this case. Although the Board sincerely regrets the additional delay, it is necessary to ensure that there is a complete record upon which to decide the Veteran's claim so that the Veteran is afforded every possible consideration. The Veteran contends that service connection is warranted for DM due to herbicide exposure in Thailand and Okinawa. VA has developed specific procedures to determine whether a veteran was exposed to herbicides in a vicinity other than the Republic of Vietnam or along the demilitarized zone (DMZ) in Korea. See M21-1MR, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chap. 2, Sec. C, Para. 10(o) (December 16, 2011). VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual (M21-1MR) directs that the Veteran should be asked for the approximate dates, location, and nature of the alleged herbicide exposure and his detailed description of exposure should be furnished to the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) Service with a request to review the Department of Defense's inventory of herbicide operations to determine whether herbicides were used as alleged. If C&P Service's review confirms that herbicides were used as alleged, then a determination must be made as to whether service connection is in order. If C&P Service's review does not confirm that herbicides were used as alleged, then a request should be sent to the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) for verification of exposure to herbicides. The RO developed this case regarding claimed herbicide exposure in Thailand, but not Okinawa. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The RO/AMC should attempt to verify the Veteran's reported herbicide exposure in Okinawa, following the procedures outlined in VBA's Adjudication Procedure Manual, M21-1MR, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chap. 2, Sec. C, Para. 10(o), including providing a description of his report exposure to the VA Compensation Service for a review of the Department of Defense inventory of herbicide operations to determine whether herbicides were used as alleged. If the Compensation Service's review does not confirm herbicide use as alleged, send a request to the JSRRC for verification of herbicide exposure in Okinawa as a engineer supply specialist. All documentation of such efforts and responses should be added to the claims file. The RO/AMC should also follow any recommendations provided by the JSRRC in obtaining relevant records from alternate sources. All requests and responses with respect to the above actions, both positive and negative, should be associated with the record. 2. The RO/AMC should then readjudicate the claim on appeal in light of all of the evidence of record. If the issue remains denied, the Veteran should be provided with a supplemental statement of the case as to the issue on appeal, and afforded a reasonable period of time within which to respond thereto. 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). _________________________________________________ S. L. Kennedy 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).