Citation Nr: 0734800 Decision Date: 11/05/07 Archive Date: 11/19/07 DOCKET NO. 05-02 706 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Montgomery, Alabama THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide exposure. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD K.A. Kennerly, Associate Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from July 1967 to December 1970. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a March 2004 rating decision of the Columbia, South Carolina, Regional Office (RO) of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), which denied the veteran's claim of entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide exposure. The case is currently under the jurisdiction of the RO in Montgomery, Alabama. The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC. VA will notify the appellant if further action is required on his part. REMAND After a thorough review of the veteran's claims folder, the Board has determined that additional development is necessary prior to the adjudication of the veteran's claim. The veteran contends that he was exposed to herbicides, Agent Orange in particular, while he was stationed at the Charleston, South Carolina, Air Force Base from August 1967 through May 1969. Specifically, the veteran claims that although his military occupational specialty (MOS) was that of administrative specialist, he was often required to assist with the loading and unloading of Agent Orange prior to its being shipped to alternate locations during the Vietnam War. During the development of the veteran's claim, the RO contacted the Department of the Air Force, Headquarters of the 437th Airlift Wing (the unit to which the veteran was assigned). A reply, received in July 2006, stated that the 437th Airlift Wing History Office had no record of the 437th Supply Squadron storing or transporting herbicides such as Agent Orange from 1967 to 1969. However, due to the nature of Charleston Air Force Bases' airlift mission at the time, it was noted to be highly probable that such items transited that installation temporarily as they made their way to employment locations. If that were the case, then the veteran would probably have been in contact with those items. The History Office also suggested that the RO contact the Air Force Historical Research Agency for further information. The RO complied with this suggestion, and in a letter received in November 2006, the Air Force Historical Research Agency responded that holdings of the 437th Military Airlift Wing and the 437th Supply Squadron official unit histories did not contain any information regarding whether Agent Orange was stored or transferred from Charleston Air Force Base. In the appellant's brief, dated in October 2007, the veteran's representative argued that VA did not search the appropriate locations for verification of whether Agent Orange was ever transported by the 437th Supply Squadron. Specifically, it was argued that the squadron's operation reports, maintenance records and daily logs would contain this information. Given the statement of the Headquarters of the 437th Airlift Wing, that the veteran would "probably have been in contact with these items," had they been present, the Board finds that additional development is necessary prior to the adjudication of the veteran's claim. Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action: 1. The AMC must obtain, to the extent possible, the 437th Supply Squadron's operation reports, maintenance records and daily logs from July 1967 through May 1969. The AMC should contact the appropriate agencies to obtain this information. If no information is available, a statement to that effect and describing all efforts undertaken must be associated with the veteran's claims folder. 2. After completing the above action and any other development as may be indicated by any response received as a consequence of the actions taken in the paragraph above, the claim for service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to herbicide exposure, should be readjudicated. If the claim remains denied, a supplemental statement of the case should be provided to the veteran and his representative. After they have had an adequate opportunity to respond, this issue should be returned to the Board for further appellate review. The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter or matters the Board has remanded. See Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999). This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment. The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner. See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West 2002 & Supp. 2007). _________________________________________________ BARBARA B. COPELAND Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2007).