1.H.2-5. e. When to Request Additional Evidence in Herbicide Claims For herbicide exposure claims, additional development to the Veteran for evidence of a claimed disability covered under (Disease associated with exposure to certain herbicide agents), is not warranted as the evidence requirements are covered under the Disability Service Connection evidence table of the VA Form 21-526EZ, Application for Disability Compensation and Related Compensation Benefits. Additional development to the claimant is still required if the claimed disability is not covered under , or herbicide exposure is unverified. References: For more information on reviewing the claims folder for proof of RVN service, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.1.f developing for proof of RVN service, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.1.g, and action to take when the claimed disability is not covered under , see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.1.h. f. Reviewing the Claims Folder for Proof of RVN Service Certain documents within the claims folder may show proof of RVN service. See the table below for guidance on reviewing documents that may show RVN service or temporary duty (TDY) service in the RVN between January 9, 1962, and May 7, 1975. Review … For … all certified DD Forms 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty entries such as Foreign Service: Republic of Vietnam, or a separating station/last duty assignment in the RVN. military personnel records, including the DA Form 20, Enlisted Qualification Record verification of service locations any travel or flight orders any statements in performance evaluations related to travel or flights, and any TDY orders. service treatment records (STRs) and dental records treatment in the RVN with particular attention to Army Post Office (APO) numbers, which may be associated with a location in which the presumption of herbicide exposure applies. Reference: For a list of APO address numbers for the Asian Pacific Theater during the Vietnam Era, see the document on the Compensation Service Stressor Verification
i. Informing the Veteran About the Agent Orange Registry Program If the development activity determines further development is necessary per M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.1.d, the development activity should also inform the Veteran of the availability of hospital examinations and treatment as part of the Agent Orange Registry program, and if the Veteran has already had the herbicide examination or been treated for herbicide exposure, request that the Veteran submit a copy of the examination or treatment report, or the name of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facility performing the examination or treatment so that a copy of the report may be associated with the claims folder. j. Action to Take When the Veteran Claims Herbicide Exposure but Does Not Claim a Disability A claim is not substantially complete if a Veteran claims herbicide exposure during service, but does not claim SC for a specific disability. In cases such as these inform the Veteran that he/she must identify a specific disability, since exposure in and of itself is not a disability, and ask the Veteran to identify the disability(ies) that resulted from exposure to herbicides during service. Important: do not process the claim as a denial, or establish end product (EP) control for the incomplete claim, and whenever possible, telephone the Veteran to obtain the information needed to substantiate the claim. Reference: For more information on what constitutes a substantially complete application for benefits, see , and M21-1, Part I, 1.B.1.b. k. Formal Findings That VA Lacks the Information JSRRC Requires to Verify Herbicide Exposure If a claimant fails to provide the information the U.S. Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) requires to determine whether a Veteran served in an area associated with herbicide exposure, the regional office’s (RO’s) JSRRC Coordinator must prepare a formal finding that documents this fact. Before preparing the formal finding, the JSRRC Coordinator must review the Veteran’s claims folder to confirm the RO gave the claimant an opportunity to provide the information JSRRC requires properly followed established procedures for verifying the Veteran’s claimed route of exposure, and
ship as evidence of presumptive exposure to herbicides if there is evidence that the Veteran’s ship docked to the shore of the RVN, or sent crew members ashore, and the claimant was stationed aboard the ship at that time. Important: The presumption of herbicide exposure extends to any Veteran who served aboard a ship that entered inland waterways. 4 Can duty or Visitation in the RVN be conceded based on the above steps? If yes, concede exposure as discussed in M21-1, Part III, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.f. If no, ensure the development procedures in M21-1, Part III, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.g and h have been properly completed, and follow the JSRRC procedures outlined in M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.i. Important: Service on a ship operating on the RVN’s inland waterways constitutes duty or visitation in the RVN. f. Presumption of Exposure to Herbicides With Verified Service Aboard Ships Operating on Inland Waterways Veterans with verified service aboard ships operating on the RVN inland waterways qualify for presumption of Agent Orange exposure according to the Agent Orange Act of 1991 implemented under . Note: Veterans are not required to state that they went ashore if the service aboard ships during the time the ships were operating on inland waterways is verified. References: For more information on the definition of inland waterway, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.a, and verification of service aboard ships operating on inland waterways, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.b, and M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.2.e-g. g. Developing Claims Based on Exposure to Herbicides During Service Aboard Ships Operating on When the evidence of record is not sufficient to verify a Veteran’s claim of exposure to herbicides while serving aboard a ship that operated on the offshore waters of the RVN, then develop for evidence showing the ship operated temporarily on the RVN inland waterways docked on the shores or piers of the RVN, or
of the decision. Reference: For more information on Thailand military bases and herbicide exposure, see the . 6. Developing Claims Based on Herbicide Exposure on Johnston Island Introduction This topic contains information on developing claims based on herbicide exposure on Johnston Island, including an overview of herbicide storage on Johnston Island, and a Fact Sheet on herbicide storage on Johnston Island. Change Date August 7, 2015 a. Overview of Herbicide Storage on Johnston Island Herbicides were stored in drums on Johnston Island in the North Pacific between April 1972 and September 1977. Because military contractors were responsible for the inventory, few military personnel who served on Johnston Island had duties involving the direct handling of herbicides. If a Veteran alleges exposure to herbicides during service on Johnston Island, obtain verification of exposure on a factual basis. Reference: For more information on verifying exposure to herbicides on a factual basis, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 1.H.7. b. Fact Sheet: Herbicide Storage on Johnston Island Below is a Fact Sheet on the storage of the herbicide Agent Orange on Johnston Island. FACT SHEET: STORAGE OF AGENT ORANGE ON JOHNSTON ISLAND Approximately 1.5 million gallons of Agent Orange (AO) were stored on Johnston Island (JI) between April 1972 and September 1977, when it was incinerated at sea.
Actions Following Claims Folder Review development for medical evidence verification of service dependency payee status military pay, and/or burial information. b. EP Control of Claims Under the Nehmer Stipulation Control all Nehmer claims as follows If ... Then ... the claim is received prior to the Secretary’s announcement to add new presumptive conditions, and requires readjudication based on a prior claim and decision for the benefit control with EP 687. Note: Use of the EP 687 for adjudications under Nehmer was discontinued effective September 7, 2011. the claim is a new claim that requires adjudication, and it is received on or after the date of the Secretary’s announcement control with EP 681. the claimed benefit is peripheral neuropathy (PN) conduct a one-time Pending Inquiry File (PIF) Clear (PCLR) of EP 686 when the claims folder is sent to QTC Medical Services for initial checklist review of eligibility for SC of PN under the Nehmer stipulation RO completes the initial checklist review of eligibility for SC of PN under the Nehmer stipulation, and control the adjudication of positive checklist cases with EP 020 and special issue indicator of Nehmer AO Peripheral Neuropathy. Important: Any subsequent claims received after establishment of the appropriate Nehmer EP will be worked under a separate, appropriate EP, whether rating or non-rating.
Reference: For more information on PN for Nehmer purposes, see M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, 2.C.3.j. c. Information to Include in Nehmer Development Letters to the Veteran When readjudication of a claim under the Nehmer stipulation requires development to the Veteran, letters to the Veteran should include notification that the claim will be readjudicated with all of the procedural rights normally applicable to VA decisions the Veteran will be afforded a reasonable time to present evidence or reasons why the claim should be considered under the new regulations, and if the VA does not receive such evidence or reasons, VA will make a decision based on the evidence considered in the previously decided claim. d. Scheduling an Examination for a Nehmer Claim The mere passage of time since a VA examination was completed does not automatically require VA to provide a new medical examination, as stated in , 21 Vet.App. 174, 182 (2007). The determination of whether an examination is warranted is made on a case-by-case basis primarily focused on whether the evidence of record is adequate for rating purposes and accurately reflects the overall disability picture. Important: When entering an examination request, notify the VA medical facility in the Remarks section that the claim is a Nehmer case and should not be canceled due to incorrect jurisdiction. e. Returned Mail Procedures for Claims Based on the Nehmer Stipulation Upon receipt of mail that has been returned as undeliverable pertaining to a Nehmer claim review the returned mail for any forwarding address indicated by the U.S. Postal Service review the claims folder review Share, Compensation and Pension Records Interchange (CAPRI), and other systems, as applicable, to verify the validity of the address utilized in the development letter if a valid address still cannot be verified, attempt to make telephone contact with the payee, and if there is evidence of a previous electronic funds transfer with complete bank information, send a letter to the bank. Important: Document all efforts to locate a payee on VA Form 27-0820, Report of General Information summarizing each action taken to identify a current address. If VA attempted to locate multiple payees, a separate VA Form 27-0820 shall be completed for each payee with a summary for each individual. After completion, the claim shall be forwarded to the rating activity for a decision based on the evidence of record, if one is not yet completed.