Citation Nr: 21006824 Decision Date: 02/05/21 Archive Date: 02/05/21 DOCKET NO. 19-00 443 DATE: February 5, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to prostate cancer is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active duty service in the United States Navy from May 1966 to February 1970. He testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) at a virtual hearing in February 2021. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is remanded; entitlement to service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to prostate cancer is remanded. The Veteran contends that he served within the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam. A review of his military personnel records reflects that he served aboard the USS BRISTER (DER-327) from September 1966 to July 1967 and the USS PIEDMONT from September 1967 until discharge in February 1970. He seeks entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, a presumptive disorder related to herbicide exposure, and erectile dysfunction on a secondary basis. Recently, in Procopio v. Wilkie, 913 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2019) the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Court) held that the statutory phrase “the Republic of Vietnam” includes the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of that nation. Procopio, 913 F.3d. at 1375-76. By extension, the presumption of herbicide agent exposure extends to those veterans with service in the territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam. The Board further notes that, on June 25, 2019, the President signed into law the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019, which extends the presumption of exposure to herbicide agents to those veterans who served within the 12 nautical miles of Vietnam. Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019, H.R. 299, 116th Cong. (2019). This law took effect on January 1, 2020. Id. at § 2(g). Historical literature of the USS PIEDMONT as well as the USS BRISTER establish that they were, at points, used within the waters of Vietnam. However, the Board is unable to discern the exact dates and is also unable to discern whether the ships were within 12 nautical miles of the coast. Accordingly, the Board finds that additional development is warranted to determine whether the Veteran’s service on the USS PIEDMONT and USS BRISTER was within 12 nautical miles of the coast of Vietnam, which would entitle him to the presumption of herbicide agent exposure. The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Complete all necessary development to determine whether the USS BRISTER and the USS PIEDMONT were within the 12 nautical mile territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam at any time while the Veteran was serving aboard. To the extent possible, obtain and review the deck logs of the USS BRISTER from September 1966 to July 1967, and the deck logs of the USS PIEDMONT from September 1967 to February 1970. All efforts to verify any such service must be documented in the case file. If no records are found and additional requests would be futile, notify the Veteran and his representative in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(e). 2. If the RO is able to confirm that the Veteran served within 12 nautical miles of the coast of Vietnam, obtain a VA medical opinion addressing the etiology of the Veteran’s erectile dysfunction. The need for an in-person examination is left to the discretion of the examiner. After reviewing the entire claims file, the examiner is asked to opine: (a.) Whether the Veteran’s prostate cancer at least as likely as not caused his erectile dysfunction; (b.) Whether the Veteran’s prostate cancer at least as likely as not aggravated his erectile dysfunction.   A complete rationale for any medical opinion rendered must be provided. H.M. WALKER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Martha R. Luboch, 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.