Citation Nr: 21029588 Decision Date: 05/14/21 Archive Date: 05/14/21 DOCKET NO. 20-24 049 DATE: May 14, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for multiple myeloma, to include as due to herbicide agent exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served in the United States Navy from June 1962 to February 1972, as well as additional service in the Naval Reserve. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an August 2018 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). The Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in April 2021. While the Board regrets further delay, the Veteran's claim must be remanded for additional development. The Veteran asserts that entitlement to service connection for multiple myeloma is warranted as a result of exposure to herbicide agents in the Republic of Vietnam. A Veteran who served in the Republic of Vietnam between January 9, 1962, and May 7, 1975, is presumed to have been exposed to certain herbicide agents (e.g., Agent Orange) during such service, absent affirmative evidence to the contrary. 38 U.S.C. § 1116(f); 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii). Service connection based on herbicide agent exposure will be presumed for certain specified diseases that become manifest to a compensable degree, to include multiple myeloma. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). On January 1, 2020, the Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act of 2019 (the Act) became effective which, which in pertinent part, includes in the presumption of exposure to herbicide agents those veterans who served offshore of the Republic of Vietnam during the period from January 9, 1962 to May 7, 1975. "Offshore" is defined as a location not more than 12 nautical miles seaward of a line commencing on the southwestern demarcation line of the waters of Vietnam and Cambodia and intersecting at certain points. The Veteran maintains that he served offshore of the Republic of Vietnam while aboard the USS Remora (SS-487), a U.S. Navy submarine. While the record supports that the Veteran indeed served on this vessel, his claim has been denied by the RO based on a lack of information confirming the Remora's presence offshore of the Republic of Vietnam for presumptive service connection purposes. The Board notes, however, that lay evidence provided by fellow retired Navy personnel suggests that because the Remora's operations at the time of the Veteran's service were classified, its deck logs would be limited in information. See June 4, 2020 Email Correspondence. Indeed, relevant copies of the Remora's deck logs that are of record merely state that the vessel was repeatedly "underway as before." However, it has also been suggested that an additional log was kept by the Remora's Quartermaster, which recorded the ships daily events including its exact positions. As such, the claim must be remanded to determine the existence of any additional logbooks pertaining to the Remora. The Board also notes that the Veteran reenlisted in the US Navy while still aboard the Remora in May 1966, which is noted on his DD Form 214. Importantly, his DD Form 214 specifically notes that the Veteran entered this period of active duty at coordinates l17° 15' N, 110° 45' E. While not an exact location, the Board notes that these coordinates do coincide with an area of the South China Sea between the Republic of Vietnam and the Philippines, confirming that the Veteran was aboard the Remora at a time when it came at least close to the offshore waters of Vietnam for presumptive service connection purposes. In readjudicating the appeal, the RO should consider these coordinates in determining whether all doubt should be resolved in the Veteran's favor as to whether the Remora was ever within the defined offshore waters of the Republic of Vietnam. The matter is therefore REMANDED for the following action: 1. Conduct additional development to determine if the Veteran was in the 12-nautical mile territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam during his service aboard the USS Remora (SS-487), to include from the Naval Historical Center, Ships History Branch, the National Archives and Records Administration, and/or any other source deemed appropriate. The Board notes that lay statements of record suggest the existence of log books other than deck logs, such as a "Quartermaster's log." All efforts in this regard should be clearly documented in the claims file. 2. Then, the record should again be reviewed. In readjudicating the Veteran's claim, consideration should be given to the coordinates (l17° 15' N, 110° 45' E) indicated on the Veteran's DD Form 214 at the time of his May 1966 reenlistment. If any benefit sought on appeal remains denied, the Veteran and his representative should be furnished with a supplemental statement of the case and be given the opportunity to respond. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board R. Scarduzio, 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.