Citation Nr: 22008067 Decision Date: 02/11/22 Archive Date: 02/11/22 DOCKET NO. 18-22 434 DATE: February 11, 2022 REMANDED Service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. A disability rating in excess of 30 percent for a lower right eyelid scar is remanded. A disability rating in excess of 10 percent for eversion of the lower right eyelid is remanded. An effective date earlier than for the assignment of service connection for a lower right eyelid scar is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably in the United States Navy from February 1974 to February 1978. Unfortunately, the Veteran passed away in November 2020. The Veteran's surviving adult child has been substituted as the Appellant. These matters come to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a February 2017 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This appeal is being adjudicated under the legacy appellate framework. The Appellant testified at a personal hearing before the Board in October 2021, and a transcript of the hearing is of record. 1. Service connection for prostate cancer is remanded. At issue is whether the Veteran should have been assigned service connection for prostate cancer. The Appellant argues that it should be presumed that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents while he was allegedly serving in a U.S. Navy vessel in the territorial sea of the Republic of Vietnam. In support of this contention, the Appellant submitted documentation that a ship the Veteran was stationed on was ostensibly within Vietnam's territorial sea. The Board cannot grant the Appellant's requested relief at this time without some verification of these documents. Therefore, this matter must be remanded in order to obtain such verification. 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(c)(1). 2. A disability rating in excess of 30 percent for a lower right eyelid scar is remanded. The Veteran filed a notice of disagreement (NOD) in January 2018 challenging the disability rating for a lower right eyelid scar. The record is silent for a statement of the case (SOC) responsive to this claim. While this issue is listed in a SOC issued in March 2018, the Board observes that the SOC does not contain a decision on this issue nor is the issue discussed in the Reasons and Bases of the SOC. As the issue has not been adequately addressed in a SOC, the Board must take special jurisdiction over this issue in order to remand it for the issuance of a SOC. Manlincon v. West, 12 Vet. App. 238 (1999). 3. A disability rating in excess of 10 percent for eversion of the lower right eyelid is remanded. 4. An effective date earlier than for the assignment of service connection for a lower right eyelid scar is remanded. The Veteran's increased rating claim for eversion of the lower right eyelid and earlier effective date claim for a lower right eyelid scar is inextricably intertwined with the Veteran's increased rating claim for a lower right eyelid scar. Therefore, these matters must be remanded as well in order to avoid piecemeal appellate litigation. Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Investigate which ships that the Veteran served onboard during his service in the U.S. Navy as well as the dates that the Veteran served onboard these vessels. Pertinent military records memorializing these periods of time should be obtained from the appropriate federal agency and associated with the claims file. If such records cannot be obtained than any and all attempts to obtain them should be memorialized in the claims file. 2. Investigate whether any of the ships that the Veteran served onboard during his service in the U.S. Navy ever sailed within the territorial sea or the inland waters of the Republic of Vietnam as well as the dates in which these passages occurred. Pertinent military records memorializing these periods of time should be obtained from the appropriate federal agency and associated with the claims file. If such records cannot be obtained than any and all attempts to obtain them should be memorialized in the claims file. 3. Arrange to provide a medical opinion in order to dress the following. Is it at least as likely as not (50 percent or more) that a medical nexus exists between an in-service incurrence (such as exposure to herbicide agents or other contaminants or receiving treatment for prostatitis) and the prostate cancer that the Veteran was diagnosed with before he passed away? Why or why not? 4. Issue a SOC responsive to the following issue raised in a January 2018 NOD: entitlement to a disability rating in excess of 30 percent for a lower right eyelid scar. Do not return this issue back to the Board unless the Appellant files a substantive appeal perfecting the issue. DAVID L. WIGHT Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board David R. Seaton, 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.