Citation Nr: 21076343 Decision Date: 12/23/21 Archive Date: 12/23/21 DOCKET NO. 17-53 215 DATE: December 23, 2021 ORDER Service connection for lymphoma, to include chronic lymphocytic leukemia and low-grade B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents, is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran's non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is presumed to be related to exposure to herbicide agents at a Royal Thai Air Force Base in Korat, Thailand while on active-duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for lymphoma are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 1116, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.304, 3.307, 3.309, 3.313(b). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from March 1973 to March 1977. This matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2017 rating decision of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In August 2021, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. The transcript is of record. Additionally, on August 17, 2021, after the August 2017 statement of the case, the Veteran submitted additional evidence regarding herbicide agent exposure, for which there is an automatic waiver of initial agency of original jurisdiction consideration. Service Connection Service connection will be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Where a disease is first diagnosed after discharge, service connection will be granted when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes it was incurred in active service. 38 U.S.C. § 1113(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.30(d). Service connection requires evidence showing: (1) the existence of a present disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the present disability and the condition incurred or aggravated by service. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The scope of a disability claim includes any disability that may reasonably be encompassed by the claimant's description of the claim, reported symptoms, and the other information of record. Clemons v. Shinseki, 23 Vet. App. 1, 4-6 (2009). The Veteran is competent to report symptoms and experiences observable by his senses. Jandreau v. Nicholson, 492 F.3d 1372, 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007); 38 C.F.R. § 3.159(a). In relevant part, 38 U.S.C. § 1154(a) requires that VA give "due consideration" to "all pertinent medical and lay evidence" in evaluating a claim for disability benefits. Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313, 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2009). Service connection for lymphoma, to include as due to exposure to herbicide agents. The Veteran contends service connection for lymphoma. Specifically, he contends that his lymphoma disability is related to exposure to herbicide agents while stationed at the Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base, in Thailand. See 7/20/2016 VA Form 21-526EZ; see also 12/13/2016 VA 21-4138; 3/30/2017 NOD. Certain diseases associated with exposure to herbicide agents, including Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, will be presumed to have been incurred in service even though there is no evidence of that disease during the period of service at issue. 38 U.S.C. § 1116(a); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). VA policy has set forth procedures for verifying exposure to herbicide agents in Thailand during the Vietnam Era. VA has determined that there was significant use of herbicide agents on the fenced-in perimeters of military bases in Thailand intended to eliminate vegetation and ground cover for base security purposes as evidenced in a declassified Vietnam era Department of Defense document titled "Project CHECO Southeast Asia Report: Base Defense in Thailand." Special consideration of herbicide exposure on a facts-found or direct basis should be extended to those Veterans whose duties placed them on or near the perimeters of Thailand military bases. This allows for presumptive service connection of the diseases associated with herbicide exposure. The majority of troops in Thailand during the Vietnam Era were stationed at the Royal Thai Air Force Bases of U-Tapao, Ubon, Nakhon Phanom, Udorn, Takhli, Korat, and Don Muang. If a Veteran served on one of these air bases as a security policeman, security patrol dog handler, member of a security police squadron, or otherwise served near the air base perimeter, as shown by military occupational specialty (MOS), performance evaluations, or other credible evidence, then herbicide exposure should be acknowledged on a facts-found or direct basis. This applies only during the Vietnam Era, from February 28, 1961, to May 7, 1975. At the outset, post service medical records showed that the Veteran was diagnosed with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and low-grade B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, which is among the conditions associated with exposure to herbicide agents under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e). See 9/29/2016 CAPRI, at pages 130 and 164. Thus, the relevant question is whether the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents during his active-duty service. In this regard, the Veteran's service personnel records showed that the Veteran served at the Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB), in Thailand, from March 1975 to November 1975. See 8/16/2016 Military Personnel Record, at page 41. This is within the presumptive period between February 28, 1961 to May 7, 1975. His military MOS during this period was aerospace repairman. See 3/10/1977 Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. At the Board hearing, the Veteran testified that during active service he moved equipment around on the flight line or loaded airplanes 500 meters from the perimeter. Additionally, he testified that he stayed off base for a month and a half and stayed in a rented house in the local village; as such, he was going through the perimeter fencing and through the checkpoint to get back to the base. Further, he testified that twice per month he would perform foreign object damage walks up and down the aircraft parking areas, towards the flight line, the grassy knolls, and a lot of times the fence perimeter to get rid of all foreign objects to avoid damage to the turbine engines. Moreover, he testified that he would leave the barracks and walk on the trails or jog on a dirt trail that went around the perimeter. See 8/18/2021 Hearing Transcript, at pages 4, 5, 6, and 10. Although there is no record of assignment specifically to perimeter duty at the Korat RTAFB and VA was unable to confirm herbicide exposure, the Board finds the Veteran's testimony regarding time spent near the perimeter of the base at the Korat RTAFB to be both competent and credible. As there is no basis on which to question the credibility of the Veteran's testimony regarding time spent near the perimeter of the base at the Korat RTAFB and no evidence in the record to contradict his claims of perimeter contact, the Board will resolve reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor and finds that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents while he was stationed at the Korat RTAFB during the Vietnam era. Furthermore, the Veteran was afforded a VA examination in October 2016. The examiner rendered a diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and lymphoma. At the conclusion of the examination, the clinician opined that the Veteran's disability was as likely as not related to service. As rationale, the examiner stated that the Veteran's CLL and lymphoma are presumptively related to service due to exposure to herbicide agents. See 10/12/2016 C&P Examination. After review of all the competent medical and lay evidence of record, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents while serving in Thailand and that his Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma can be presumed to be related to herbicide exposure in service. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-56 (1990). As such, service connection for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is granted. Paul Sorisio Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J.F., 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.