Citation Nr: 21024007 Decision Date: 04/21/21 Archive Date: 04/21/21 DOCKET NO. 12-09 068 DATE: April 21, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to dependency and indemnity compensation (DIC) for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from August 1968 to August 1970. The Veteran died in January 2010, and the Appellant is his surviving spouse. The Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) remanded the matter for further development in November 2014. In a July 2016 decision, the (Board) denied the appeal. The Appellant appealed to the U. S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court). In January 2018, the Court issued a memorandum decision vacating the Board’s July 2016 decision. In October 2018, the Board remanded this matter for further development. As will be discussed in further detail below, this matter must once again be remanded for further development. In its October 2018 remand, the Board noted that in the November 2014 remand, it had been requested that development be done to determine the proximity of the Veteran’s unit from the DMZ while stationed in Korea. The Board noted that unfortunately, there had not been substantial compliance with the Board’s 2014 remand directives, as the June 2015 formal finding from the Joint Services Records Research Center did not provide information regarding the proximity of the Veteran’s unit from the DMZ. It found that additional development was required. In the October 2018 remand, it was requested that any development determined to be warranted in order to verify the Veteran was stationed in or near the DMZ and was exposed to herbicides in service was to be performed. Such development should determine the location of the Veteran’s unit, Battery D, 6th Battalion (Hawk), 44thArtillery, in Korea and its proximity to the DMZ. In conjunction with the Board remand, a formal finding that the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) had received a negative reply from DPRIS regarding herbicide exposure was made in April 2019. DPRIS indicated that it had reviewed the 1969 and 1970 unit histories submitted by the 6th Battalion, 44th Artillery (6th Bn, 44th, Arty) and their higher headquarters, the 38th Artillery Brigade (38th Arty Bde). DPRIS also reviewed the 1969 and 1970 chronologies submitted by the 8th United States Army. The histories documented that the 6th Bd, 44th Arty was located at Reno Hill, Kwang Cheon, South Korea. The battalion conducted active low altitude air defense along the western coast of the Republic off South Korea. However, the records did not document the use, storage, spraying or transporting of tactical herbicides to include Agent Orange. In addition, the records did not document any specific duties performed by members of the 6th Bn, 44th Arty along the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). In an August 2019 Deferred Rating Memo it was indicated that the Veteran’s service personnel records demonstrated that he had been stationed at APO 96358 Uijongbu from 1/22/69 (Closest Camps per the MAP Camp Red Cloud and Stanley) APO 96264 Kunsan from 2/11/69 to 2/7/70 (per DPRIS Reno Hill, Kwang Cheon) and APO 96271 Pyongteak 12/17/68 and 5/25/69 (Closest Camp per map Camp Humphreys). In an October 2020 Supplemental Statement of the Case, it was noted that there had been a VA Memorandum prepared of a Formal Finding that the Department of Veterans Affairs had received a negative reply from DPRIS regarding herbicide exposure, which was competed April 12, 2019. It was also indicated that VA had reviewed the maps of South Korea for locations of Kunsan Air Base in proximity to DMZ, the Google maps for approximate location/proximity/distance of Uijongbu, Kunsan and Pyongteak from Dongducheon, to DMZ, and the map of North/South Korea that the appellant had provided the VA. It was noted that these maps showed Kunsan Air Base was located along the southwestern border of South Korea. It was observed that these maps did not provide a specific scale of the relationship of Kunsan Air Base to the DMZ but they did confirm that the Kunsan Air Base was not within the proximity the DMZ. Unfortunately, neither the DPRIS report or the Supplemental Statement of the Case addressed the proximity of the Veteran being in Uijongbu from 1/22/69 (Closest Camps per the MAP Camp Red Cloud and Stanley) or APO 96271 Pyongteak 12/17/68 and 5/25/69 (Closest Camp per map Camp Humphreys). The RO only addressed the proximity of Kunsan Air Base. As the Court specifically requested that the proximity of the Veteran to the DMZ line be discussed and as the proximity of the Veteran being in Uijongbu from 1/22/69 (Closest Camps per the MAP Camp Red Cloud and Stanley) or APO 96271 Pyongteak 12/17/68 and 5/25/69 (Closest Camp per map Camp Humphreys) were not addressed in the DPRIS or in the Supplemental Statement of the Case, the Board has no alternative but to remand this matter for consideration of the Veteran’s proximity to the DMZ when stationed at either of these places. (Continued on the next page)   The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Conduct any development determined to be warranted in order to verify the Veteran was stationed in or near the DMZ and was exposed to herbicides in service, to include but not limited to the Veteran being in Uijongbu from 1/22/69 to 2/11/69 (Closest Camps per the map Camp Red Cloud and Stanley) or APO 96271 Pyongteak 12/17/68 and 5/25/69 (Closest Camp per map Camp Humphreys) and their proximity to the DMZ. K. Parakkal Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. S. Kelly, 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.