Citation Nr: 21008534 Decision Date: 02/17/21 Archive Date: 02/17/21 DOCKET NO. 14-21 607 DATE: February 17, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is granted. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran was exposed to herbicides during service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for prostate cancer have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1116, 1131, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.307, 3.309. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from December 1961 to March 1984, with service at Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) from May 1966 to May 1967. This case was previously before the Board, most recently in January 2019, when it was denied. The Veteran appealed that decision to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (Court), and in June 2020, the matter was vacated and remanded to the Board. The Veteran testified at a November 2017 Travel Board hearing in support of his claim. The Veterans Law Judge (VLJ) who presided over the Travel Board hearing has retired from the Board. Although the Board’s standard practice is to send a notice letter advising the Veteran of his right to an additional hearing before a different VLJ the Board finds the failure to do so it not prejudicial given the Board’s decision to grant the appeal. See 38 U.S.C. § 7107(b). Service connection may be established for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active military, naval, or air service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. Service connection may be granted for any disease initially diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). Service incurrence for certain diseases, including prostate cancer, will be presumed based on an association with certain herbicide agents (e.g., Agent Orange). 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). Such a presumption, however, requires evidence of actual or presumed exposure to herbicides. VA has recognized herbicide exposure for veterans who performed their duties on or near the perimeters of Thai military bases during the Vietnam era, to include the Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB). The Veteran was diagnosed with prostate cancer. The dispositive issue in this case is whether the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents. The Veteran has alleged that he was exposed to herbicide agents (e.g. Agent Orange) during his service in Thailand. He has also reported that he was in Vietnam during a stopover en route to a training at Clark Air Force Base. Regarding the reported presence in Vietnam, the Veteran indicated that he and his supervisor, R.R.H., were selected for a class at Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines in February 1967. The Veteran stated he and R.R.H. took a plane from Takhli RTAFB to Clark Air Force Base, with stopovers at Tan Son Nhut Air Base in the Republic of Vietnam, including an eight hour wait in Vietnam on the way to Clark Air Force Base. In support of these assertions, the Veteran submitted corroborative statements from R.R.H. and his spouse. See June 2013 and April 2014 letters. The Veteran’s performance evaluation for October 1966 through April 1967 were filled out by R.R.H., which verify that R.R.H. was the Veteran’s supervisor. The performance evaluation indicate that the Veteran’s responsibilities included ensuring reports met NORS requirements and implementing procedures for using AUTODIN. The performance evaluation does not report that the Veteran completed any training. Service personnel summaries indicate that the Veteran completed multiple trainings in 1967, noted as ECI courses. The performance evaluation for the period from September 1967 to February 1968 indicate that the ECI courses were completed during this period. The service records do not corroborate the reported training at Clark Air Force Base or any training prior to September 1967. The Joint Service Records Research Center (JSRRC) reported that research into the Veteran’s unit in 1967 at Takhli RTAFB was negative for any personnel stopping over in Tan Son Nhut Air Base while en route to Clark Air Force Base. Regarding the claimed exposure at Takhli RTAFB, the Veteran has stated that he came in contact with the perimeter of the base during the course of his duties in the supply support unit; he indicated that he would drop off and pick up supplies, replacement parts, and other items at several buildings around the base, the flight line, and at the perimeter. In support of that assertion, the Veteran submitted a copy of his Air Force Commendation Medal description, noting that he worked with several different units throughout the base, including communications, electronics, meteorological equipment, aerospace ground equipment, vehicles and aircraft engines units as part of the base supply support unit. In another statement, the Veteran indicated that he worked with the petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) unit, which was located at the perimeter of the base. Additionally, the Veteran also indicated that his hootch was close to the perimeter of the base, approximately a football field away from the perimeter. The Veteran submitted several photographs documenting his hootch, as well as what he described as the perimeter of the base. He further stated that he jogged along the perimeter of the base, as well as played football and other sports in a field that was adjacent to the perimeter of the base. The Veteran also sent in several photographs of himself “downtown,” noting that to leave the base he had to cross the perimeter. Finally, the Veteran testified that he performed guard duty during his service at Takhli RTAFB. He stated that supply personnel were utilized for guard duty and that he walked the perimeter as a “base augmentee security alert team member”; he submitted a photograph of himself dressed in his security alert uniform that he was issued after training; he noted weapons were only given out when he was on guard duty. The Veteran has specifically reported that he was at the perimeter during his tour of duty in Thailand. The Veteran is competent to report this history and the Board finds the statements reporting proximity to the base perimeter credible because they are consistent with the Veteran’s noted duties while at Takhli. Considering the Veteran’s service records and his credible statements, the weight of the evidence is at least in equipoise regarding whether his duties frequently took him near the perimeters of Takhli RTAFB. Consequently, the Board finds that based on the particular circumstances of this case and in light of the supporting evidence, this Veteran was likely exposed to herbicide agents during his service in Thailand during the Vietnam era. As prostate cancer is a presumptive condition, no nexus opinion is needed. The Veteran’s claim of entitlement to service connection is granted. T. REYNOLDS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board N. Snyder, 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.