Citation Nr: 21024596 Decision Date: 04/23/21 Archive Date: 04/23/21 DOCKET NO. 16-31 490 DATE: April 23, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran had active service at the Takhli Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) during the Vietnam era. 2. The Veteran’s duties at Takhli RTAFB during the Vietnam era took him near the base perimeter, and herbicide agent exposure is accepted on a facts-found basis. 3. The Veteran has prostate cancer which is presumed to be related to exposure to herbicides during his active service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for prostate cancer have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1110, 1112 (2018); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303, 3.307, 3.309 (2020). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active service in the United States Air Force from January 1967 to January 1993. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2014 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). In January 2021, the Veteran testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A copy of the transcript is associated with the claims file. The Veteran has asserted that he has prostate cancer that is etiologically related to his active service. Specifically, the Veteran indicated that his prostate cancer is due to herbicide exposure. In this case, the Veteran did not have service in the Republic of Vietnam, rather he has asserted that he served at Takhli RTAFB. He testified that while he was officially classified as a cook and also worked in a storeroom ordering supplies and issuing supplies, he was selected to be a security police augmentee and regularly had patrols on the perimeter of the airbase. VA concedes herbicide exposure for United States Air Force Veterans who served in Thailand during the Vietnam era at certain RTFABs, to include Takhli RTAFB, if they served as security policemen, security patrol dog handlers, members of the security police squadron, or otherwise near the air base perimeter as shown by evidence of daily work duties, performance evaluation reports, or other credible evidence. Per his military personnel record, the Veteran’s military occupational specialty (MOS) was a Cook. As the Veteran did not work with Air Force security, the Board must determine, based on evidence of daily work duties, performance evaluation reports, or other credible evidence whether the Veteran’s regular duties placed him on or near the perimeter of the base. The Veteran submitted a statement in September 2016 and reported that he served at Takhli RTAFB in Thailand for eighteen months from March 1968 to September 1969. He noted that he was assigned to the 355th Service Squadron, 355th Combat Support Group. The Veteran stated that he was assigned an additional duty as a Security Patrol Augmentee which required that he patrol the base perimeter. He reported that he recalls that chemicals were always being sprayed that would leave a residue on his skin and smelled funny. He noted that he was exposed to the chemicals for many hours both day and night during his duties as a patrol augmentee and during training performed in the field. In January 2021, the Veteran testified that he was exposed to herbicides while serving at Takhli RTAFB when he was chosen to be a police augmentee and was responsible for patrolling the perimeter of the airbase. In considering the Veteran’s active service at Takhli RTAFB during the Vietnam War era and his statements and testimony regarding his duties on and near the perimeter of the base; the Board finds that evidence is, at the very least, in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran served at Takhli RTAFB near the perimeter of the base. Therefore, the Board will resolve all doubt in favor of the Veteran in finding that he worked near the Takhli RTAFB perimeter. Accordingly, his exposure to herbicide agents in Thailand is conceded on a factual basis. A review of the record shows that the Veteran has a diagnosis of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a disease enumerated for purposes of presumptive service connection due to exposure to herbicide agents. 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) (2020). In sum, the Veteran is presumed to have been exposed to herbicides while serving in Thailand. A May 2014 VA examination establishes that the Veteran was diagnosed with prostate cancer, and the status of the disease was determined to be active. As such, the manifestation of his disability is consistent with at least a 10 percent rating under 38 C.F.R. §§ 4.115a, 4.115b, Diagnostic Code 7528. (Continued on the next page)   Therefore, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is for the claim and entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer is warranted. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b) (2018); Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Kristin Haddock Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Cryan, 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.