Citation Nr: 20023082 Decision Date: 04/03/20 Archive Date: 04/03/20 DOCKET NO. 18-39 711 DATE: April 3, 2020 REMANDED The claim of entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide is remanded. The claim of entitlement to service connection for left upper peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. The claim of entitlement to service connection left lower peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. The claim of entitlement to service connection for right lower peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. The claim of entitlement to service connection for right upper peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from February 1970 to February 1974. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a September 2017 rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In February 2020, the Veteran testified at a Board videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. 1. The claim of entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide is remanded. 2. The claim of entitlement to service connection for left upper peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. 3. The claim of entitlement to service connection left lower peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. 4. The claim of entitlement to service connection for right lower peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. 5. The claim of entitlement to service connection for right upper peripheral neuropathy, to include as due to herbicide exposure is remanded. The Veteran seeks to establish service connection for prostate cancer and neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities. He contends that these conditions are causally related to exposure to Agent Orange during his tour of duty while stationed at the Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Takhli, Thailand. Specifically, the Veteran asserts that his in-service occupation delivering munitions from the bomb dump to the flight line at the perimeter of the base exposed him to Agent Orange. See February 2020 Board hearing. The Veteran’s DD214 indicates that his military occupational specialty (MOS) was a munitions maintenance and an explosive operator. His service personnel records indicate that he served in Thailand for 115 days, however, the location was not listed. In September 2017, the Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) made a formal finding that VA lacks the information the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) requires to verify herbicide exposure in Vietnam. In the formal finding the AOJ indicated the Veteran’s DD-214 showed he served in Taiwan and TDY in Thailand for 115 days, but that the evidence did not show service in Vietnam. The Board notes, however, it is not the Veteran’s contention that he served in Vietnam, rather he asserts he was exposed to Agent Orange while serving in Takhli, Thailand. No further research was undertaken by the AOJ to determine the specific location in Thailand the Veteran served for 115 days. The Board finds that additional development is required on remand. Specifically, the AOJ should undertake all necessary actions to determine whether the Veteran served at RTAF in Takhli, Thailand. Such action may include conducting further inquiry with the JSRRC, and any other development deemed appropriate. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the appropriate VA Medical Center and obtain and associate with the claims file all outstanding records of treatment. If any requested records are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. Efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts to obtain them would be futile. The non-existence or unavailability of such records must be verified, and this should be documented for the record. Required notice must be provided to the Veteran and his or her representative. 2. Undertake all necessary actions to determine whether the Veteran served on the RTAFB in Takhli, Thailand, beginning in September 1972, to include submitting a request to the JSRRC. Specific development should address the Veteran’s contentions in his July and August 2017 statements. If additional information is necessary, the RO shall contact the Veteran to obtain clarification. If any requested records or documentation are not available, or the search for any such records otherwise yields negative results, that fact must clearly be documented in the claims file. Efforts to obtain these records must continue until it is determined that they do not exist or that further attempts to obtain them would be futile. The non-existence or unavailability of such records must be verified and this should be documented for the record. Required notice must be provided to the Veteran and his or her representative. K. MILLIKAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Braxton, Associate Counsel 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.