Citation Nr: 18148370 Decision Date: 11/07/18 Archive Date: 11/07/18 DOCKET NO. 16-15 629 DATE: November 7, 2018 REMAND Entitlement to service connection for cancer of the right eye, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from June 1970 to March 1974. These matters come to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from an October 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In March 2018 the Veteran testified at a travel Board hearing with the undersigned Veterans Law judge (VLJ). The Veteran has asserted that he was stationed at Udorn and Korat Royal Thai Air Force Bases (RTAFB), where he was exposed to herbicides during the Vietnam era. The Veteran testified at his March 2018 Board hearing that part of his duties required him to burn confidential information inside the base next to the perimeter once a week. He also testified that he flew over Vietnam every three days and sometimes would land in Vietnam if MiGs were sent after them. The Veteran also submitted a news article which detailed how an aircraft had been grounded because a rat was found aboard the aircraft, and such was a danger to the mechanics of the aircraft. The Veteran has also submitted buddy statements from M.A. in May 2016 and from A.L. in June 2016, corroborating the Veteran’s statements regarding the burning of documents and exposure to Agent Orange and asserting that the location of their squadron and aircraft loading zone was in close proximity to the vegetation free zones where Agent Orange was sprayed. The Veteran’s service personnel records reflect that he served as an intelligence operations specialist. See DD Form 214. The Veteran’s service personnel records reflect that from June 1971 until June 1972 the Veteran served as an intelligence specialist in Thailand. It appears that from June 1971 to October 1971 he served at Udorn RTAFB and then spent the remainder of his time at Korat RTAFB. If a veteran served with the U.S. Air Force at a certain specified Royal Thai Air Force Bases, including Korat and Udorn, as an Air Force security policeman, security patrol dog handler, member of the security police squadron, or otherwise near the air base perimeter as shown by evidence of daily work duties, performance evaluation reports, or other credible evidence, herbicide exposure is conceded on a facts-founds basis. See M21-1, part IV, subpt. ii, ch. 1, sec. H.5.b. In this case, however, the record shows that the Veteran was not an Air Force security policeman, security patrol dog handler, member of the security police squadron, member of a military police unit, or with a military police occupational specialty. His performance reports reflect that, while stationed at the Korat RTAFB in Thailand, he served as an intelligence specialist and processed, analyzed and evaluated target intelligence. He prepared and maintained target maps, charts and viewgraphs, and flew as airborne intelligence on combat missions. See Performance Report for period from October 1971 to May 1972; Military Personnel Record, p. 44-49. A JSRRC response indicates that they could not document that the Veteran had been exposed to tactical herbicides or that his duties required him to be on or near the base perimeter. See October 2014 Formal Finding with accompanying Memorandum for the Record regarding herbicide use in Thailand. However, it appears that these records were created prior to the Veteran providing additional information about his job duties, to include how he asserts he was exposed to herbicides. Accordingly, the Board concludes that further development is necessary before a decision can be reached on these claims. The matters are remanded for the following actions: (Continued on the next page)   Make efforts to corroborate the Veteran’s assertion that he was exposed to herbicide agents to include while (1) burning classified documents near the perimeter of Udorn and Korat RTAFBs; (2) flying over Vietnam as part of his duties as an intelligence specialist, the C-130 planes he was flying in had to land in Vietnam when MiGs were fired at them. The following information should be considered when determining whether the Veteran’s duties likely took him near the perimeter or that his duties involved service in Vietnam: from June 1971 until June 1972 the Veteran served as an intelligence specialist in Thailand, from June 1971 to October 1971 he served at Udorn RTAFB and then spent the remainder of his time at Korat RTAFB; a summary of his duties as an intelligence specialist, see Performance Report for period from October 1971 to May 1972; Military Personnel Record, p. 44-49; May 2016 buddy statement from M.A. and August 2016 from A.L.; and Hearing Transcript p. 5. S. HENEKS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD N. Kamal, Associate Counsel