Citation Nr: 21062806 Decision Date: 10/12/21 Archive Date: 10/12/21 DOCKET NO. 17-53 649 DATE: October 12, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus type II is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from May 1970 to April 1972. This matter is on appeal from an October 2016 decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). On the October 2017 VA Form 9, Appeal to Board of Veterans' Appeals, the Veteran requested a hearing by live videoconference at a local VA office. In a July 2020 statement, the Veteran withdrew his hearing request. 1. Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease is remanded. 2. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. 3. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus type II is remanded. The Veteran contends that the disabilities on appeal are related to in-service exposure to herbicide agents. However, the Board finds that additional development is necessary to determine whether exposure to herbicide agents can be presumed. In January 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision in Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371, 1380-81 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (en banc), in which the Federal Circuit held that Veterans who "served in the 12-nautical-mile territorial sea of the 'Republic of Vietnam'" are entitled to presumptive service connection under 38 U.S.C. § 1116. Subsequently, legislation was enacted that added 38 U.S.C. § 1116A, providing in part for a presumption of herbicide agent exposure for Veterans who served offshore of the Republic of Vietnam during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 7, 1975. "Offshore" is defined as being in a location not more than 12-nautical-miles seaward of a line commencing on the southwestern demarcation line of the waters of Vietnam and Cambodia and intersecting several specific latitude and longitude points. Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019, Pub. L. No. 116-23 (June 25, 2019). In a July 2016 letter, the Veteran stated that he anchored near the shoreline off the Mekong River outlet and was generally stationed one mile offshore and within the 3-mile-limit on the coast of South Vietnam. In January 2020, the Veteran filed a claim for benefits based on the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act provisions. The RO failed to conduct any appropriate development and denied the claim summarily in a February 2021 rating decision without addressing the Veteran's contentions. The record reflects that the Veteran served aboard the U.S.S. Chevalier during the applicable period. The record also contains deck logs and service records which note the coordinates of the U.S.S. Chevalier, but the RO has not yet conducted development to make a factual determination as to whether its location was within the 12-nautical-mile territorial sea. Thus, the Board finds that additional development must be completed to determine whether the Veteran's service aboard the U.S.S. Chevalier was within the 12-nautical-mile territorial waters of the Republic of Vietnam. The record also reflects the Veteran receives VA treatment; thus, updated VA treatment records should be associated with the claims file. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain the Veteran's VA treatment records for the period from February 2021 to the present. 2. Undertake all additional development deemed necessary to determine whether the Veteran served within the 12-nautical-mile territorial waters of the Republic of Vietnam during his service aboard the U.S.S. Chevalier. All pertinent evidence of record, to include coordinates noted on deck logs, shall be considered when making this determination. J. B. FREEMAN Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. H. White, 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.