Citation Nr: 20002829 Decision Date: 01/13/20 Archive Date: 01/13/20 DOCKET NO. 15-35 019 DATE: January 13, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for ischemic heart disease, to include as due to herbicide exposure, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, to include as due to herbicide exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty with the United States Navy from February 1965 to November 1968. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 2013 rating decision by the Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Veteran testified at a February 2019 hearing at the RO held before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ). A transcript of the hearing is associated with the electronic claims file. Exposure to tactical herbicide agents, to include Agent Orange, is presumed for veteran’s who, during active military, naval, or air service, served offshore of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975. Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2019), codified in 38 U.S.C. § 1116A. A location is considered offshore of Vietnam if it is not more than 12 nautical miles seaward of a line commencing on the southwestern demarcating line of the waters of Vietnam and Cambodia and intersecting several specific latitudes and longitudes. 38 U.S.C. § 1116A(d). In the Veteran’s original claim for service connection, received April 2012, he asserted that he served on both the USS Enterprise and USS Carronade. Since then, he has continued to contend that he served on the USS Enterprise but has not made any additional reference to service on the USS Carronade. Personnel records have confirmed his service aboard the USS Enterprise during 1967 and 1968 but do not indicate service on the USS Carronade. During the February 2019 hearing, the Veteran’s representative referenced ship records which showed the travel route of the USS Enterprise. Although the representative stated that she intended to have them associated with the electronic file, no records were produced. A remand is required to secure potentially relevant federal records. 38 U.S.C. §§ 5103, 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. Furthermore, documentation from the Defense Personnel Records Information Retrieval System (DPRIS) regarding the presence of the USS Enterprise in Vietnam were previously obtained and associated with the Veteran’s claims file in November 2012. A formal finding of lack of information was provided in June 2013. Although the findings concluded that “The history and deck logs do not document that the ship docked, transited inland waters, or that personnel stepped foot in the Republic of Vietnam,” it states that the carrier was present in the Gulf of Tonkin and Yankee Station during 1968. At the Board hearing, the Veteran stated that he did not go ashore in Vietnam. However, since a portion of the Gulf of Tonkin is within 12 nautical miles territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam, further development should be made to determine whether the Ship operated within this area. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Undertake appropriate development to obtain any outstanding records pertinent to the Veteran’s claim, including records verifying the Veteran’s service and dates of service onboard the USS Carronade. If any requested records are not available, the record should be annotated to reflect such, and the Veteran notified. 2. Contact the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) and any other appropriate agency to request verification of the Veteran’s alleged exposure to herbicide during his service onboard the USS Enterprise in 1967 and 1968, to include a determination as to whether the USS Enterprise operated within the 12 nautical miles territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam. Separate responses must be provided for each 60-day period. 3. Then, readjudicate the claim on appeal. If the benefit sought is not granted, issue a Supplemental Statement of the Case before returning the file to the Board, if otherwise in order. WILLIAM H. DONNELLY Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board S.P. Faris 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.