The Veteran's death was service-connected due to exposure to herbicide agents during his time stationed near the perimeter of Korat Royal Thai Air Force Base. The appellant is granted DIC benefits for her husband’s cause of death.
The deciding factor: The Veteran had a credible account of being exposed to herbicide agents while stationed at Korat RTAFB, and this exposure was found to be service-connected due to his duties near the perimeter of the base.
- Claimed conditions
- Malignant neoplasm
- How they argued it
- Presumptive (no nexus needed)
- Exposure basis
- Burn pits / airborne hazards
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- May 14, 2019
- Citation
- 19136999
Veterans Law Judge
Decisions by this judge: 2,017 · Granted: 36% (granted or partly granted, in the vetted decisions on this site)
Judge attribution: 2025 complete; earlier years partial.
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 19136999.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to a potential issue with the appellant's status as the surviving spouse and an incomplete medical opinion regarding the cause of death.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claim for reimbursement of unauthorized medical expenses incurred at a private facility due to lack of prior authorization from VA, and because the treatment was not for an emergency situation.
- Granted
The Board of Veterans' Appeals has granted service connection for PTSD and Mood Disorders, both presumed conditions under the PACT Act.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's claim for an earlier effective date for diabetes mellitus type II with erectile dysfunction was denied as the evidence did not show that he had been diagnosed and manifested to at least a 10 percent disability rating on or prior to May 8, 2001.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.