Citation Nr: 21025719 Decision Date: 04/28/21 Archive Date: 04/28/21 DOCKET NO. 14-14 052 DATE: April 28, 2021 ORDER Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran passed away in May 2012. According to the death certificate, arrhythmia (asystole) and acute myocardial infarction were the immediate and underlying causes of death respectively. 2. The Veteran’s acute myocardial infarction had manifested to a degree of 10 percent disabling. 3. Giving the Appellant the benefit of the doubt, the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during service in Thailand. The acute myocardial infarction is presumed to be associated with herbicide agent exposure. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death have been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1310; 38 C.F.R. § 3.312. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1963 to January 1966. The Veteran passed away in May 2012. The Appellant is the surviving spouse. This matter originally came before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a February 2013 decision that denied the Appellant’s “claim for VA benefits.” This matter has previously been remanded by the Board for further development, most recently in January 2018. This matter is again before the Board. Service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is granted. The Appellant believes that service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is warranted. See July 2013 NOD. To warrant service connection for the cause of a veteran’s death, the evidence must show that a disability incurred in or aggravated by active service, even if initially diagnosed after service, was the principal or contributory cause of death. In order to constitute the principal cause of death, such disability must be one of the immediate or underlying causes of death. See 38 U.S.C. § 1310; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.303, 3.312. 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 the “Project CHECO Southeast Asia Report: Base Defense in Thailand.” Special consideration of herbicide agent 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 agent exposure. If a veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active service and develops a disease listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) that becomes manifest to a degree of 10 percent disabling or higher, it will be service connected on a presumptive basis even though there is no record of the disease during service.  This is true of acute myocardial infarction.  38 C.F.R. § 3.307(a)(6); 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e).  Under 38 C.F.R. § 4.104, Diagnostic Code 7006, a 100 percent disability rating is warranted during and for three months following myocardial infarction documented by laboratory tests. The benefit of the doubt will be given to a claimant when there is an approximate balance of evidence concerning any material issue in the matter.  38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.  The Veteran’s death certificate shows that acute myocardial infarction was the underlying cause of death. See July 2013 Death Certificate. Acute myocardial infarction is one of the diseases listed in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e) that will allow for service connection on a presumptive basis if it manifested to a degree of 10 percent disabling or higher and if the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active service.  The Board gives the Appellant the benefit of the doubt and finds that the Veteran’s acute myocardial infarction did manifest to a degree of 10 percent disabling or higher based on a medical record showing that the Veteran had an acute myocardial infarction in 2012. See January 2019 C&P Exam. Therefore, the final question is whether the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during active service.  Service records show that the Veteran was in Thailand from late February 1964 to late February 1965. See May 2016 Military Personnel Record. The Appellant reported that the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during his service in Thailand. Specifically, the Veteran told her that he walked the base perimeter while on guard duty, transported an herbicide agent to an aircraft, and filled the tanks for spraying. See July 2013 NOD; July 2018 Statement in Support of Claim. Medical records also show that the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during service. See May 2018 CAPRI. Finally, an affidavit was provided by an individual who reported serving with the Veteran in Thailand. The individual reported an incident in Thailand when he and the Veteran were performing guard duty on the base perimeter and were exposed to an herbicide agent being sprayed from an aircraft, which the Veteran had helped load onto the aircraft the day before. The Veteran knew that he loaded an herbicide agent onto the aircraft because of the labeling on the containers. See February 2020 Affidavit. The Board finds the Appellant and the individual who served with the Veteran in Thailand competent to make the above lay statements.  The Board has no reason to doubt their credibility.  The Board gives the lay statements great probative value.  See Layno v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 465, 469 (1994).  The Board also finds the other evidence above highly probative.  Based on the evidence of record, the Board gives the Appellant the benefit of the doubt and finds that the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during service in Thailand. Specifically, the Appellant credibly testified to what the Veteran told her about guard duty at the base perimeter in Thailand and about loading an herbicide agent onto an aircraft. The individual who served with the Veteran in Thailand credibly testified concerning the Veteran’s exposure to an herbicide agent while performing guard duty at the base perimeter in Thailand and how the Veteran had helped load an herbicide agent onto an aircraft. Therefore, the Board finds that the Veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during service in Thailand.   In sum, the Veteran had acute myocardial infarction under 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(e), which manifested to a degree of 10 percent disabling or higher, and the Veteran is found to have been exposed to an herbicide agent during active service. Therefore, the acute myocardial infarction is service connected. The service-connected acute myocardial infarction was the underlying cause of the Veteran’s death.   Therefore, service connection for the cause of the Veteran’s death is granted.  MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board A. Dougan, 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.