Citation Nr: A21018585 Decision Date: 11/22/21 Archive Date: 11/22/21 DOCKET NO. 190321-5213 DATE: November 22, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, due to herbicide agent exposure in Thailand is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, is presumptively related to tactical herbicide agent exposure in Thailand. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, due to herbicide agent exposure in Thailand are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from February 1969 to March 1976 with service at Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Thailand. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal of an August 2018 rating decision by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). A rating decision was issued under the legacy system in August 2016. In May 2018 the Veteran opted into the modernized review system, also known as the Appeals Modernization Act (AMA), by submitting a Rapid Appeals Modernization Program (RAMP) election form and selecting the higher-level review (HLR) lane. The RO issued the HLR rating decision in August 2018, which is the decision on appeal. In the March 2019 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal, the Veteran elected the Hearing docket. The Veteran testified at a virtual hearing conducted by the undersigned Veterans Law Judge in March 2021. Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the May 2018 RAMP opt-in, as well as any evidence submitted by the Veteran or his representative at the March 2021 hearing or within 90 days following the hearing. 38 C.F.R. §20.302(a). The Board notes that statements from the Veteran's representative were added to the claims file in August 2021 and October 2021. However, this evidence is ineligible for review by the Board as it was submitted more than 90 days following the March 2021 Board hearing. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes mellitus, type II, due to herbicide agent exposure in Thailand Service Connection Law and Regulations Service connection may be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred or aggravated in active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). In general, service connection requires the following: (1) evidence of a current disability; (2) evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). A veteran who served on active duty in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam Era is presumed to have been exposed to an herbicide agent during such service, absent affirmative evidence establishing that he was not. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6), (d). If a veteran exposed to an herbicide agent pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6) develops a disease delineated in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e), it shall be service connected on a presumptive basis even though there is no record of such disease during service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) provides an exhaustive list of the diseases that may be service connected on a presumptive basis. For service in Thailand during the Vietnam Era, there is no similar statutory or regulatory presumption of exposure to an herbicide agent during such service. Nonetheless, pursuant to VA policy, special consideration will be accorded on a factual basis, and exposure to herbicide agents will be acknowledged if the veteran served at the RTAFBs at U-Tapao, Ubon, Nakhom Phanom, Udorn, Takhli, Korat, or Don Muang; and served as a security policeman, security patrol dog handler, member of a security police squadron, or otherwise served near the base perimeters. Service near a base perimeter may be shown by a veteran's military occupational specialty (MOS), daily work duties, performance evaluations or other credible evidence. Analysis The Veteran contends that his diabetes mellitus, type II, is due to exposure to herbicide agents while station at Korat RTAFB in Thailand. See March 2016 statement. Specifically, he asserts that he was assigned to operate a dozer to clear the perimeter of the base and during that time he was exposed to Agent Orange. In the August 2018 HLR rating decision on appeal, the RO favorably found the Veteran has been diagnosed with diabetes mellitus, type II. A current disability has therefore been demonstrated. The record also indicates that the Veteran's disability has manifested to a degree of 10 percent or more following service. With respect to an in-service incurrence, the Board found that the Veteran had been exposed to tactical herbicide agents in a September 2021 decision. Accordingly, because the VA has found that the Veteran was exposed to tactical herbicide agents while on active duty service in Thailand and has developed diabetes mellitus, a disease known to be associated with such exposure, the Board finds that service connection for diabetes mellitus is warranted. 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. M. Donohue Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Aston, 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.