Citation Nr: 22015288 Decision Date: 03/17/22 Archive Date: 03/17/22 DOCKET NO. 17-57 372 DATE: March 17, 2022 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served on active duty from December 1964 to December 1968. The Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) is grateful for his service. The Veteran died in August 2015. The appellant is his surviving spouse. The appellant testified at a hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a hearing conducted in January 2022. A transcript is of record. Entitlement to service connection for the cause of the Veteran's death is remanded. The appellant contends, in effect, that service connection is warranted for the cause of the Veteran's death based on his having been exposed to herbicide agents (e.g., Agent Orange) while stationed at the Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base (RTAFB) in Thailand during the Vietnam Era, and the diseases which caused or contributed to his death warrant presumptive service connection based on that exposure. The Veteran's death certificate informs that he died of ventricular fibrillation, caused by acute chronic ischemic heart disease and end stage congestive heart failure (CHF) ischemic cardiomyopathy, contributed to by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and diabetes mellitus, type II. Both ischemic heart disease and diabetes mellitus, type II, are diseases for which presumptive service connection is recognized if it is established that the Veteran was exposed to herbicide agents in service. 38 U.S.C. § 1116; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307 (a)(6), 3.309(e). However, the current record fails to establish the Veteran's exposure to herbicide agents in service. VA's Compensation & Pension Service has issued information concerning the use of herbicides in Thailand during the Vietnam War and determined that special consideration of herbicide exposure on a factual basis should be extended to veterans whose duties placed them on or near the perimeters of Thailand military bases during the period beginning on January 9, 1962, and ending on May 8, 1975. VA Adjudication Manual, M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chapter 1, Section H.5. VA identifies several Royal Thai Air Force Bases (RTAFBs) in Thailand, including U-Tapao, Ubon, Nakhon Phanom, Udorn, Takhli, Korat, and Don Muang, and pursuant to the VA Adjudication Manual, herbicide exposure should be acknowledged on a facts found or direct basis if a United States Air Force veteran served at one of the RTAFBs as a security policeman, a security patrol dog handler, a member of a security police squadron, or otherwise served near the air base perimeter, as shown by evidence of daily work duties, performance evaluation reports, or other credible evidence. VA Adjudication Manual, M21-1, Part IV, Subpart ii, Chapter 1, Section H.5.b. Prior to his death, in a statement submitted in April 2015, the Veteran alleged that his hooch was initially near the base perimeter and that he was thus exposed to herbicide agents, but that the base was subsequently expanded so his hooch was no longer at the perimeter. He also alleged that he was driven to work every day along the perimeter in the back of an open truck. The Veteran then made other, more obscure arguments related to Operation Ranch Hand and speculation about purpose of C-123 Aircraft. Service personnel records support the Veteran's stationing at Udorn Royal Thai AFB between January 1967 and February 1968, but do not support his having worked at perimeter, as security police, dog handler, or similar duties at the base perimeter. Personnel records show he worked as an air traffic controller in Thailand. An August 1967 commendation informs that Veteran also worked as a trainer for Thai nationals to work as air traffic controllers. He was then grade A1C, and thus unlikely to have spent time on guard duty, and he did not so allege. Two question thus arise which may potentially be verified or discounted by a military historian through official channels: 1) was the Udorn RTAFB expanded at some time during or after the Veteran's period of stationing there from January 1967 to February 1968, and if so would a grade A1C air traffic controller have been assigned to live in a hooch at or very near the perimeter of the base during some interval from January 1967 to February 1968, prior to the expansion of the base; and 2) during the interval from January 1967 to February 1968, would military personnel, including in particular a grade A1C air traffic controller, have been permitted to ride in the back of an open truck every day along the perimeter of the base between his hooch and the air traffic control facility, and did such a route even exist at the Udorn RTAFB during that time interval? The matter is REMANDED for the following actions: 1. Through appropriate channels, the following questions should be addressed by a military historian: (a.) Was the Udorn RTAFB expanded at some time during or after the Veteran's period of stationing there from January 1967 to February 1968, and if so, would a grade A1C air traffic controller have been assigned to live in a hooch at or very near the perimeter of the base during some interval from January 1967 to February 1968, prior to the expansion of the base? (b.) During the interval from January 1967 to February 1968, would military personnel, including in particular a grade A1C air traffic controller, have been permitted to ride in the back of an open truck every day along the perimeter of the base between his hooch and the air traffic control facility, and did such a route even exist at the Udorn RTAFB during that time interval? An explanation should be provided with these responses. The request and any official response should be associated with the claims file. 2. Thereafter, readjudicate the appealed claim. L. CHU Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board D. Schechter 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.