VA Agent Orange presumptive rules: who is presumed exposed.

The short version

The Agent Orange rules have two halves that work together. The first half is about exposure: was the veteran exposed to an herbicide agent during service? The second half is about disease: does the veteran now have one of the conditions the regulation lists? When both halves line up, the regulation says the listed disease "shall be service-connected" even though there is no record of it during service. That is what "presumptive" means here: VA presumes the link instead of asking the veteran to prove it with a doctor's nexus opinion.

This page walks through both halves using the text of 38 CFR 3.307(a)(6) and 3.309(e) as published in the eCFR, current as of October 29, 2026. It is a reading guide, not a prediction of any decision. The regulation is amended from time to time, and the section links at the bottom show the live text. The eCFR text of 3.309(e) lists 14 diseases and has not yet been conformed to 38 U.S.C. 1116(a)(2) as amended by the NDAA for fiscal year 2021 and the PACT Act; VA applies the statutory list of 19 conditions.

What counts as an herbicide agent

Section 3.307(a)(6)(i) defines "herbicide agent" narrowly. It means a chemical in an herbicide used in support of United States and allied military operations in the Republic of Vietnam from January 9, 1962 through May 7, 1975, and it names four: 2,4-D; 2,4,5-T and its contaminant TCDD; cacodylic acid; and picloram. Popular usage says "Agent Orange" for all of this, but the regulation uses the umbrella term herbicide agent and defines it by that list and that time window.

Who is presumed to have been exposed

You do not have to prove that you personally touched the chemicals if you fall into one of the groups below that the regulation or VA presumes exposed. In each case the presumption can be overcome by "affirmative evidence" that there was no exposure.

• Vietnam service. Active service in the Republic of Vietnam between January 9, 1962 and May 7, 1975 (3.307(a)(6)(iii)). The regulation says "service in the Republic of Vietnam" includes service in the waters offshore and service in other locations if the conditions of service involved duty or visitation in the Republic of Vietnam. VA also counts service on inland waterway vessels and on vessels within 12 nautical miles of the Vietnam and Cambodia demarcation line. The last day of presumed exposure is the last day of that Vietnam service.
• Korean DMZ. VA presumes exposure for service in or near the Korean DMZ for any length of time between September 1, 1967 and August 31, 1971. The eCFR text of 3.307(a)(6)(iv) still prints the narrower April 1, 1968 start and a Department of Defense unit determination, and points to 38 CFR 3.814(c)(2), which this page did not read.
• C-123 aircraft. Air Force or Air Force Reserve personnel who "regularly and repeatedly operated, maintained, or served onboard" C-123 aircraft known to have sprayed an herbicide agent in the Vietnam era (3.307(a)(6)(v)). The regulation defines that phrase: assigned to a squadron while it was permanently assigned one of the affected aircraft, with an Air Force Specialty Code showing flight, ground maintenance or medical crew duties on those aircraft.
• Other listed locations. Under the PACT Act, VA also presumes exposure for service at any U.S. or Royal Thai base in Thailand from January 9, 1962 to June 30, 1976; in Laos from December 1, 1965 to September 30, 1969; in Cambodia at Mimot or Krek, Kampong Cham Province, from April 16, 1969 to April 30, 1969; in Guam or American Samoa or their territorial waters from January 9, 1962 to July 31, 1980; and on Johnston Atoll or a ship that called there from January 1, 1972 to September 30, 1977. These come from VA guidance and 38 U.S.C. 1116, not from the eCFR text of 3.307(a)(6).

Outside those groups, the regulation's presumption of exposure does not apply, though the opening words of 3.309(e) still cover any veteran who "was exposed to an herbicide agent during active military, naval, or air service." Such a veteran would have to show the exposure with evidence.

The 19 presumptive conditions

Rows 1 to 14 are the diseases the eCFR text of 3.309(e) lists, as follows; where the regulation adds a parenthetical, it is quoted. Rows 15 to 19 are presumptive conditions listed in 38 U.S.C. 1116(a)(2) that VA applies but that the eCFR text has not yet picked up.

Two notes in the regulation shape how to read the list. Note 1 spells out which tumors count as "soft-tissue sarcoma" (for example liposarcoma, leiomyosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, angiosarcoma and synovial sarcoma, among others). Note 2 says ischemic heart disease "does not include hypertension or peripheral manifestations of arteriosclerosis such as peripheral vascular disease or stroke, or any other condition that does not qualify within the generally accepted medical definition of Ischemic heart disease." So a heart-related diagnosis is not automatically on the list; the label has to fit the regulation's definition. Hypertension is now its own listed condition (row 18), separate from ischemic heart disease.

The timing rule: 10 percent, and three one-year limits

Section 3.307(a)(6)(ii) says the listed diseases must have become manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more "at any time after service." That is deliberately open-ended for most of the list. There is one exception, and it covers three entries: chloracne or other acneform disease consistent with chloracne, porphyria cutanea tarda, and early-onset peripheral neuropathy. Those three must have become manifest to a degree of 10 percent or more within a year after the last date on which the veteran was exposed to an herbicide agent during service.

The checker below applies that distinction. Enter the disease group and the months between the last exposure and the first time the disease reached 10 percent. For a Vietnam veteran the last exposure date is the last day of service in the Republic of Vietnam in the window. The checker only compares numbers to the regulation's time limit; it does not decide whether a condition is rated at 10 percent, which is a rating-schedule question.

Worked example of the timing rule

Suppose a veteran left Vietnam in March 1971, and early-onset peripheral neuropathy first reached a compensable level 20 months later. Because that disease is one of the three with the one-year limit, the 12-month window had closed, and the presumption in 3.307(a)(6) does not apply on those facts. The regulation does not say the claim is hopeless: VA still decides claims on ordinary service connection principles. Now suppose a different veteran from the same period is diagnosed with prostate cancer 30 years later. Prostate cancer is not one of the three, so the "at any time after service" language applies and the timing rule is met, assuming exposure is established.

What the presumption does not do

The presumption connects the disease to service. It does not say the disease is rated at any particular percentage, which depends on the rating schedule in 38 CFR Part 4. It does not cover conditions missing from the list, although a veteran can still try to show service connection by direct evidence of a link. The regulation also keeps a "rebuttable presumption" safety valve: 3.309(e) applies only if the rebuttable presumption provisions of 3.307(d) are also satisfied, which allow evidence to the contrary to defeat the presumption.

Finally, this page reports what the eCFR text says as of October 29, 2026. The five conditions added by statute are noted above; this page does not otherwise summarize other presumptions such as the Camp Lejeune list in 3.309(f) or the Persian Gulf provisions in 3.317.