Citation Nr: 20007191 Decision Date: 01/28/20 Archive Date: 01/28/20 DOCKET NO. 17-16 167 DATE: January 28, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus, including as due to herbicide agent exposure is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for anoplastic astrocytoma, including as due to herbicide agent exposure is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Army from January 1970 to June 1972 with service in Korea. The Board notes that the Veteran’s Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD-214) reflects that he has days lost under 10 U.S.C. § 972 from January 2, 1972 to January 4, 1972; January 22, 1972; February 15, 1972 to February 21, 1972; March 7, 1972 to March 14, 1972; April 1, 1972 to May 3, 1972; and May 5, 1972 to May 8, 1972. These matters come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a July 29, 2014 rating decision by the Roanoke, Virginia Regional Office (RO) of the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). 1. Entitlement to service connection for type II diabetes mellitus, including as due to herbicide agent exposure is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for anoplastic astrocytoma, including as due to herbicide agent exposure is remanded. Due to the similar dispositions for the above claims on appeal, the Board will address them in a common discussion below. The Veteran asserts that his type II diabetes mellitus and anoplastic astrocytoma are due to herbicide agent exposure and that he was exposed to such while stationed in Korea. Specifically, he asserts that over a 14-day period, he was required to drive his officer-in-charge (OIC) to the demilitarized zone (DMZ). The Veteran’s claims file does not appear to contain his complete service personnel records for his period of service in the United States Army. As they may contain information regarding the Veteran’s duties performed and the location(s) of those duties, including driving his OIC to the DMZ, a remand is required to obtain them. VA has a duty to assist claimants to obtain evidence needed to substantiate a claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A; 38 C.F.R. § 3.159. VA’s duty to assist includes providing a medical examination when is necessary to make a decision on a claim. 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(d); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4). The RO did not provide the Veteran with an examination. Such development is necessary if the information and evidence of record does not contain sufficient competent medical evidence to decide the claim, but (1) contains competent evidence of diagnosed disability or recurrent symptoms of disability, (2) establishes that the Veteran suffered an event, injury or disease in service, or has a presumptive disease during the pertinent presumptive period, and (3) indicates that the claimed disability may be associated with the in-service event, injury, or disease, or with another service-connected disability. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(4); McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79, 83-86 (2006) (noting that the third element establishes a low threshold and requires only that the evidence “indicates” that there “may” be a nexus between the current disability or symptoms and active service, including equivocal or non-specific medical evidence or credible lay evidence of continuity of symptomatology). Here, the Veteran is diagnosed with type II diabetes mellitus and anoplastic astrocytoma, but there is not currently sufficient evidence of an in-service event. If, after obtaining the Veteran’s service personnel records and/or a Joint Service Records Research Center (JSRRC) request to verify the Veteran’s assertions, there is sufficient evidence to show that the Veteran served at or near the Korean DMZ, he shall be entitled to VA examinations for his claimed disabilities due to herbicide agent exposure. The Board notes that in an April 2013 correspondence, a private medical care provider asserted that the Veteran was exposed to Agent Orange while he served at the DMZ in Korea in 1970; he was operated on for a cerebral astrocytoma in May 2000; and the private provider believed that there may be some correlation to these events as Agent Orange has been implicated with various medical disorders. However, because exposure has yet to be verified, it is not sufficient evidence to establish service connection. The matters are REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Obtain the Veteran’s complete service personnel records. 2. Determine if the Veteran served at or near the Korean DMZ, including but not limited to the Veteran’s assertion of driving his OIC to the Korean DMZ over a 14-day period. If the Veteran’s service personnel records are unable to confirm the assertions, after requesting additional information from the Veteran to clarify the relevant timeframe of his assertions, contact the JSRRC and request that agency to research the assertions of service at or near the Korean DMZ. 3. If the Veteran’s complete service personnel records and/or the JSRRC response reflect service at or near the Korean DMZ, including but not limited to a review of his enlisted evaluations reflecting performance of duty of driving his OIC to the DMZ, then schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s type II diabetes mellitus. The entire claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. Any indicated tests and studies must be accomplished and all clinical findings must be reported in detail and correlated to a specific diagnosis. The examiner is requested to provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s disability began in service, was caused by service, or is otherwise related to active military service. The examiner should specifically address the Veteran’s assertion that he was hospitalized for 14-days in Seoul Korea in 1970-1971 due to breathing problems that the Veteran believes is due to herbicide agent exposure. A complete rationale must be provided for any opinion offered. If the Veteran’s complete service personnel records and/or the JSRRC response reflect service at or near the Korean DMZ, including but not limited to a review of his enlisted evaluations reflecting performance of duty of driving his OIC to the DMZ, then schedule the Veteran for an examination by an appropriate clinician to address the nature and etiology of the Veteran’s anoplastic astrocytoma. The entire claims file must be made available to and be reviewed by the examiner in conjunction with the examination. The examiner is requested to provide an opinion as to whether it is at least as likely as not (a 50 percent probability or more) that the Veteran’s disability began in service, was caused by service, or is otherwise related to active military service. The examiner should specifically address the April 2013 private provider opinion. A complete rationale must be provided for any opinion offered. M. Tenner Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board G. Deemer 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.