Citation Nr: 21013816 Decision Date: 03/10/21 Archive Date: 03/10/21 DOCKET NO. 19-14 865A DATE: March 10, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from November 1965 to February 1969. This current matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a July 2015 Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) rating decision that denied service connection for prostate cancer. Service connection for prostate cancer The Veteran contends that his currently diagnosed prostate cancer is due to exposure to herbicide agents to include Agent Orange while he was stationed at Anderson Air Force base in Guam. The RO submitted an inquiry to the Defense Personnel Records Information Retrieval System (DPRIS) requesting verification of Agent Orange exposure for the period April 1966 through September 1966, by the 380th Strategic Aerospace Wing (SAW), higher headquarters of the 380th Organizational Maintenance Squadron (OMS). The April 2019 report notes that an undocumented unit performed a temporary duty assignment (TDY) to an undocumented location. The report history did not document the Veteran or personnel assigned to the 380th OMS were exposed to Agent Orange from aircraft they served upon returning from Vietnam. Upon review of the Veteran’s records, the RO found no evidence of the Veteran’s service in Guam. However, the Board finds that the RO has erred. Specifically, the Veteran’s service personnel records (SPRs) reflect that he was deployed on or about April 7, 1966 to the Western Pacific region to support Project ARC LIGHT for a period of 180 days. See Personnel Action Request, MPR. The record also reflects that from June 2, 1966 to September 18, 1966, he served as an aircraft mechanic with the 484th OMS, Turner AFB, GA. Anderson AFB, Guam is also listed as a station of assignment during that time period. As such, the Board finds that the Veteran had service in Guam. Importantly, the file does not contain the RO’s attempt to contact the Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) to verify the Veteran’s claimed herbicide agent exposure. Thus, VA's duty to assist requires the Board to remand this appeal for such verification of his herbicide exposure and to accord the Veteran an appropriate examination if necessary. This matter is REMANDED for the following action: 1. Contact the JSRRC or other appropriate organization and request verification of the claimed herbicide exposure when the Veteran was stationed in Guam from April 1966 to September 1966 in support of Project ARC LIGHT. Document all attempts made. Copies of the result of such a search should be associated with the Veteran’s claims folder. 2. Only if the Veteran’s in-service exposure to herbicides cannot be verified, schedule the Veteran for a VA examination to determine the nature and etiology of his prostate cancer. The electronic claims file must be reviewed by the examiner. All indicated tests and studies must be conducted, and all pertinent symptomatology must be reported in detail. After a review of the claims folder, the examiner should opine as to whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent probability or greater) that the Veteran’s prostate cancer had its onset in service or is caused by, or related to, his active service. In providing the opinion, the examiner should consider the Veteran’s competent lay claims regarding the onset of his prostate cancer. The examiner must explain the rationale for all opinions given. If unable to provide the requested opinion without resorting to speculation, the examiner should so state and should provide an explanation for such a conclusion. No action is required of the Veteran until he is notified by VA. However, he is advised of his obligation to cooperate in ensuring that the duty to assist is satisfied. Kowalski v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 171 (2005); Wood v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 190 (1991). His failure to help procure treatment records, or to report for a scheduled VA examination, may impact the decision made. 38C.F.R. § 3.655. He has the right to submit additional evidence and argument, whether himself or through his representative, with respect to this matter. Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). It must be afforded prompt treatment. The law requires that all remands by the Board or the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims be handled in an expeditious manner. 38U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West 2014). THERESA M. CATINO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. R. Bobb, 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.