Citation Nr: 21011798 Decision Date: 03/02/21 Archive Date: 03/02/21 DOCKET NO. 16-16 163 DATE: March 2, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for cause of death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from April 1971 to November 1977. He received the National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal; Air Force Good Conduct Medal; and, Air Force Longevity Service Award. The Veteran died in September 2005 and the Appellant is his surviving spouse. In October 2019, the Board denied the Appellant’s claim of service connection for cause of death. The Appellant appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In September 2020, the Court granted a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMPR) filed by the Appellant and VA’s Office of the General Counsel. The Court’s order remanded the matter for actions consistent with the terms of the JMPR. The Appellant contends that exposure to herbicides should be presumed because the Veteran served at or near the base perimeter on U-Tapao Royal Thai Air Force Base and he came into contact with C-123 aircraft. See January 2021 Form 9, pp. 1-4; August 2019 BVA Decision, p. 6. The Agency of Original Jurisdiction (AOJ) attempted to verify herbicide exposure in Thailand, see September 2017 Administrative Decision, p. 1, but there is no indication that any development was conducted to verify whether the Veteran’s assigned duties would have placed him in close proximity to the base perimeter or brought him into contact with C-123 aircraft. See March 2016 Military Personnel Records, pp. 1-2. As there is a reasonable possibility that such information would substantiate the Appellant’s claim, the Board finds that a remand is necessary. See 38 U.S.C. § 5103A(a)(2). The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Contact the appropriate repositories to obtain any information on whether the Veteran’s duties in U-Tapao would have placed him in close proximity to the base perimeter or in contact with C-123 aircraft. Any additional action necessary to obtain these records, including follow-up action requested by the contacted entity, should be accomplished. If, after making reasonable efforts, the AOJ cannot locate any additional records, it must specifically document what attempts were made to locate the records and indicate in writing that further attempts to locate or obtain any government records would be futile. J. NICHOLS Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board W.V. Walker, 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.