Citation Nr: 21021282 Decision Date: 04/12/21 Archive Date: 04/12/21 DOCKET NO. 19-23 292 DATE: April 12, 2021 ORDER Service connection for Parkinson's Disease is granted. VETERAN’S CONTENTIONS The Veteran contends that he developed Parkinson’s disease as a result of his duties as an Aircraft Maintenance Technician in service, which brought him to the perimeters of the Don Muang Royal Thai Airforce Base (RTAFB) and the Takhli RTAFB such that he was exposed to herbicide agents. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Post-service treatment records document a current diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. 2. The Veteran served at the Don Muang and Takhli RTAFBs during a period when herbicide agents are known to have been used at those bases. 3. The Veteran's in-service duties brought him to the Don Muang RTAFB and Takhli RTAFB perimeters during his active service, as a result of which he was exposed to herbicide agents. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for Parkinson’s disease are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.307(a)(6), 3.309(e). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from May 1959 to May 1985. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a June 2016 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Montgomery, Alabama. Jurisdiction is currently with the RO in Oakland, California. This matter was previously before the Board in September 2019 at which time it was remanded for further development. Entitlement to service connection for Parkinson's Disease Generally, service connection may be granted if the evidence demonstrates that a current disability resulted from an injury or disease incurred or aggravated in active military service. This means that the facts establish that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred coincident with service in the Armed Forces, or if preexisting such service, was aggravated therein. 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(a). Establishing service connection generally requires medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of (1) a current disability; (2) an in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Davidson v. Shinseki, 581 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2009); Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999); Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498, 506 (1995), aff'd per curiam, 78 F.3d 604 (Fed. Cir. 1996) (table). If a Veteran was exposed to certain herbicide agents during service, then certain listed diseases, including Parkinson’s disease, are presumptively service connected absent affirmative evidence to the contrary. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1113, 1116(a)(1), (a)(2); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307(d), 3.309(e). The foregoing statutory and regulatory provisions do not establish a presumption of exposure to herbicide agents based on service in Thailand. However, current VA policy indicates that herbicide agents, including Agent Orange, were used at certain times and places at some military bases in Thailand during the Vietnam Era. As a result, special consideration of herbicide exposure on a factual basis for veterans whose duties placed them on or near the perimeters of Thai military bases during the Vietnam era is required. Specifically, if a Veteran served as an Air Force security policeman, security patrol dog handler, or member of the security police squadron, or was otherwise near the air base perimeter as shown by evidence of daily work duties, performance evaluation reports, or other credible evidence, herbicide exposure should be acknowledged. Determinations as to service connection will be based on review of the entire evidence of record, to include all pertinent medical evidence. VA must also consider all favorable lay evidence of record. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); see also Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469-70 (1994) (a Veteran is competent to report on that of which he or she has actually observed and is within the realm of his or her personal knowledge). Here, post-service treatment records document a diagnosis of Parkinson’s disease. See August 2019 USA Health Records. Thus, the dispositive issue is whether the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents, including Agent Orange, in service which would entitle him to an award of service connection for Parkinson’s disease on a presumptive basis. In this regard, the Board notes that the Veteran is competent to report the approximate geographical locations of his service, including his service on the Don Muang RTAFB and Takhli RTAFB in Thailand, and the Board finds his assertions that his in-service duties placed him in close proximity of the perimeter of those bases, credible. The Veteran's military service personnel records reflect that his combat service included participation in aerial missions/the Vietnam/Vietnamese Campaign. The Veteran’s military service personnel records also reflect that he served as an Aircraft Maintenance Technician and had several foreign temporary duty assignments during the period from January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975. The Veteran stated in a July 2019 VA Form 9 that as a part of his duties as Aircraft Maintenance Technician, he worked on the flight line maintaining the KC-135 to which he was assigned, and therefore his duties brought him to the base perimeters of the Don Muang RTAFB and Takhli RTAFB. Although service personnel records do not definitively establish TDY service in Thailand, the Board notes again that the Veteran is competent to report the geographical locations of his assignment, and finds that his assertions are consistent with the circumstances of his service. While there are no service department records on file that expressly confirm service near the perimeter of the bases at which he was located in Thailand, there is also no affirmative evidence to establish that the Veteran did not go to the perimeter of those bases. Therefore, when considering the totality of circumstances surrounding the nature of the Veteran's service and resolving all doubt in his favor, the Board finds that the Veteran's duties brought him to the perimeter of the aforementioned bases in Thailand in the course of his service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. Thus, the Veteran's herbicide exposure is presumed. 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6)(iii). In light of the Veteran's current Parkinson’s disease and his presumed exposure to herbicide agents during service based on the facts found, the Board finds that service connection for Parkinson’s disease is warranted. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e); see also 38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6). S.C. Krembs Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Smith-Jennings, 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.