Citation Nr: 21076345 Decision Date: 12/23/21 Archive Date: 12/23/21 DOCKET NO. 17-51 731 DATE: December 23, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease, as due to herbicide exposure in Thailand is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, his current diagnosis of coronary artery disease is presumed to be related to exposure to herbicide agents during his active service in Thailand. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for coronary artery disease have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1116, 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1966 to May 1969, including service in Thailand. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from a May 2015 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). This issue was previously remanded by the Board in November 2019 and has since been returned for further adjudication. Generally, to establish service connection, a claimant 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. See 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303; see also Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1167 (Fed. Cir. 2004). The law also establishes a presumption of entitlement to service connection for diseases associated with exposure to certain herbicide agents (including coronary artery disease) and also provides a presumption of exposure for veterans who served in the Republic of Vietnam. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. § 3.307 (a)(6)(iii). VA regulations provide that a Veteran who, during active military, naval, or air service, served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period from January 9, 1962, to May 7, 1975, shall be presumed to have been exposed during such service to an herbicide agent, unless there is affirmative evidence to establish that the Veteran was not exposed to any such agent during that service. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii). In this case, the Veteran's service personnel records have not shown that he served in Vietnam. Rather, his service personnel records indicate that the Veteran served in the United States Air Force, with a military occupational specialty (MOS) as an Aircraft Maintenance Specialist, at the Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Takhli. See Form DD-214; see also January 2014 Military Personnel Record. Pertinent to the Veteran's assertions, VA has adopted a procedure for verifying exposure to herbicides in Thailand during the Vietnam era. Specifically, VA has determined that there was significant use of herbicides on the fenced-in perimeters of military bases in Thailand. The herbicide use was intended to eliminate vegetation and ground cover for base security purposes. VA has acknowledged that the herbicides used on the Thailand base perimeters may have been tactical or a commercial variant of much greater strength and with the characteristics of tactical herbicides. 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. 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 MOS (military occupational specialty), performance evaluations, or other credible evidence, then herbicide exposure should be acknowledged on a facts-found or direct basis. The Veteran contends that his duties on the flight line, and his recreational activities while stationed at Takhli RTAFB placed him around the base perimeter on a regular basis. Additionally, the Veteran submitted a map of his base and identified areas that he was located during his time in Thailand. (Continued on the next page) Overall, the evidence of record shows that the Veteran served during the Vietnam era at Takhli RTAFB. Although, service personnel records do not make it expressly apparent that the Veteran was exposed to herbicides while stationed in Thailand, the Veteran has presented lay testimony showing that he was required to work near the base perimeter as part of his MOS and travelled around base for his occupation and for recreation. The Veteran is competent to report his activities at Takhli RTAFB. Further, the Board finds his statements as to the location and the type of duties he performed while stationed in Thailand to be credible. Thus, by resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, given his service personnel records, his competent, credible statements, and pertinent information regarding herbicide use in Thailand, the Veteran was presumptively exposed to herbicides during his active service at Takhli RTAFB. Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990); 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Further, post-service medical records reflect a medical diagnosis of coronary artery disease. Therefore, service connection for coronary artery disease is warranted on a presumptive basis, and accordingly granted. See 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. P.M. DILORENZO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board M. Hofmeister 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.