Citation Nr: 21012147 Decision Date: 03/03/21 Archive Date: 03/03/21 DOCKET NO. 15-12 879 DATE: March 3, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from September 8, 1945 to November 5, 1945. The Appellant is his surviving spouse. In August 2018, the Appellant testified at a hearing before a Veterans Law Judge, other than the undersigned. Although the appellant was given an opportunity for a hearing before another judge, she declined that opportunity. A copy of the hearing transcript is associated with the claims file. The Board previously remanded this appeal in April 2019 and July 2020. For the reasons below, the Board regrettably finds another remand is required prior to adjudication. Entitlement to nonservice-connected death pension benefits is remanded. The Appellant asserts that the Veteran served on active duty for approximately eight years, to include service in Korea, and that she is therefore entitled to nonservice-connected death pension benefits. Multiple requests have been made to the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) to obtain the Veteran’s complete military personnel file. Unfortunately, the NPRC has indicated the Veteran’s records were missing and likely destroyed in a catastrophic July 1973 fire. The NPRC provided a Certification of Military Service showing the Veteran served from September 8, 1945, to November 5, 1945. In cases where the Veteran’s service treatment records (or other relevant records) are unavailable through no fault of the claimant, there is a heightened obligation to assist the claimant in the development of his or her case. O’Hare v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 365 (1991). In August 2018, the Appellant testified at her Board hearing that during service, the Veteran was stationed at the following locations: Fort Dix, New Jersey; Savannah, Georgia; Seoul, South Korea; and Japan. The Appellant also submitted the Veteran’s obituary and pictures from the Veteran’s active duty service; the Veteran’s obituary states he served in the Korean War and received the Korean Service Medal with three Bronze Service Stars, United Nations Service Medal, and the AOM (Ger) National Defense Service Medal. The July 2020 Board remand directed the RO to contact other potential repositories for the requested information aside from the NPRC, to include the VA Records Management Center (RMC), U.S. Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC), and the local military bases where Appellant reported the Veteran served. However, no responses to these requests have been added to the claims file. Additionally, on remand, the RO should contact the Appellant to obtain additional information regarding the Veteran’s service awards that were noted in his obituary. After this further development has been completed, searches must be conducted to attempt to verify the Veteran’s service awards as the awarding of the Korean Service Medal with three bronze service stars could demonstrate as much as 120 days of continuous wartime service during the Korean War. The matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Add the responses received, if any, to the Veteran’s claims file in response to the July 2020 Board remand directives. 2. Contact the Appellant and provide her a reasonable amount of time to respond to the following questions: a) Please state how you were able to identify the Veteran’s noted service medals? b) Do you have the actual service medals? If not, what happened to the service medals? c) Were the service medals received by the Veteran listed on a document or piece of paper that is still in your possession? 3. The RO should take the appropriate steps to verify the Veteran’s noted service awards. 4. Regardless of whether the in-service awards are confirmed through the appropriate agency, the RO should also seek to obtain any documentation that reflects the criteria and/or requirements that must be met in order to receive each of the noted awards. Michael J. Skaltsounis Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. R. Montalvo, 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.