Citation Nr: 21062161 Decision Date: 10/06/21 Archive Date: 10/06/21 DOCKET NO. 20-17 836 DATE: October 6, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, to include as secondary to herbicide exposure, is granted. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as secondary to herbicide exposure, is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active duty service in Thailand. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, to include as secondary to herbicide exposure, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. 2. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the criteria for entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as secondary to herbicide exposure, have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran served on active duty in the Air Force from July 1965 to April 1988. These matters come before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a February 2018 rating decision from a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office. In October 2021, the Veteran testified at a videoconference before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing is not yet available. However, this appeal meets the criteria for VA's One-Touch initiative program. As such, this decision is being prepared pursuant to the program in order to provide an immediate response to the Veteran after his hearing. The transcript of the hearing will be added to the electronic claims file later in the normal course of business. Now the matters before the Board. The Veteran seeks service connection for coronary artery disease and prostate cancer. He testified that his exposure to herbicide agents during active duty service at and around the perimeter of Camp Udorn in Thailand resulted in his current disabilities. Service Connection A veteran is entitled to VA disability compensation if there is disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in active service, or for aggravation of a preexisting injury suffered or disease contracted in line of duty in active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110, 1131. To establish an entitlement to service connection for a disability, a veteran must show: (1) a present disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the disease or injury incurred or aggravated during service, the so-called "nexus" requirement. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Alternatively, 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 within a specified period of time in the case of certain diseases. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307 (a)(6), 3.309(e). Notably, coronary artery disease and prostate cancer are included in the list of enumerated diseases. Id. VA has extended the presumption of herbicide agent exposure to a Vietnam-era veteran who served in Thailand at certain designated bases, to include Udorn, and whose duties placed him or her on or near the perimeter of the base where Agent Orange was sprayed. In a May 2010 Bulletin, VA's Compensation & Pension Service indicated that herbicide agent exposure should be acknowledged on facts found or direct basis if a United States Air Force veteran served as a security policeman, a security patrol dog handler, a member of a security police squadron, or otherwise served near the perimeter of one of the identified air bases in Thailand, including Udorn, as shown by military occupational specialty, performance evaluations, or other credible evidence. When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b). For VA to deny a claim on its merits, the preponderance of the evidence must be against the claim. See Alemany v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 518, 519 (1996), citing Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App., at 54. Coronary Artery Disease and Prostate Cancer Initially, the Board notes that the evidentiary record shows the Veteran's current diagnoses of coronary artery disease and prostate cancer. As such, the only issue that remains in this case is whether the Veteran had herbicide agent exposure during his active duty service. The Veteran's military personnel record shows he had active duty service in Thailand during the Vietnam era at Camp Udorn in July 1971. His military occupation specialty was airborne aircraft radio technician. See Military Personnel Record, Chronological Listing of Service (July 1965 to July 1971). As to his exposure to herbicide agent, the Veteran testified he was around the Thailand perimeter at Camp Udorn and exposed to herbicides. Indeed, the claims file contains the Veteran's lay statement, detailing his proximity to the perimeter and herbicide exposure. See Veteran's October 2017 Correspondence. The Board finds he is competent and credible to report facts and circumstances surrounding his service in Thailand. Based on above, the Board resolves any reasonable doubt and finds the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active service in Thailand. Accordingly and resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that entitlement to service connection on a presumptive basis based on exposure to herbicides for coronary artery disease and prostate cancer is warranted. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1112, 1113, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. MICHAEL LANE Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Gipson, Associate 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.