Asbestosis decisions — 2008

The Board has determined that the veteran's bilateral foot disability was not incurred in or aggravated by his active duty service, and denied reopening of his claim for asbestosis. The veteran's acne vulgaris is currently rated at 30 percent.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been presented to reopen the veteran's service connection claims for asbestosis and right hallux valgus. The RO will now consider these claims on their merits.

The Board has remanded the case due to a change in hearing judge and will schedule a travel board hearing for the veteran.

The Board granted a 30 percent evaluation for asbestosis from September 22, 2005 to September 7, 2006 and a 60 percent evaluation beginning September 7, 2006. The veteran's respiratory limitations were attributed to his service-connected asbestosis.

The VA has granted a noncompensable disability rating for the veteran's asbestosis, effective September 28, 2004. The veteran was previously assigned a 30 percent disability rating from March 1, 2005.

The Board has determined that the veteran's fatal lung cancer was caused by his in-service asbestos exposure, and service connection for the cause of death is granted.

The Board has determined that additional development is needed to address the appellant's claims for service connection and burial benefits. The claims will be remanded for proper VCAA notice, evidence of asbestos exposure during service, and a VA physician's opinion regarding the relationship between the veteran's death and his service-connected conditions.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have viral meningitis, encephalitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a chronic disability involving memory loss, a chronic disability involving muscle weakness, or asbestosis. The veteran's claims for these conditions are denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for asbestosis and an increased rating for his gastroesophageal reflux disease with Barrett's esophagus.

The veteran's initial evaluations for asbestosis prior to October 4, 2006 were denied. From October 4, 2006, the evaluation was increased to 30 percent but remains denied.

The Board has determined that further review is needed to determine if the veteran's asbestosis is related to service exposure, and thus may grant or deny the claim for service connection.

The Board has determined that the veteran's service-connected asbestosis warrants a 10 percent disability rating, effective from the date of his original claim.

The Board has determined that the veteran's asbestosis does not meet the schedular criteria for a 10 percent disability rating, and thus denied an initial compensable rating.

The veteran's claim for a 100% rating for asbestosis was granted, effective from January 7, 2000. The Board found that the earliest evidence showing entitlement to this rating is an August 15, 2001 pulmonary function test.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for a left knee disability, residuals of a broken lower jaw, and a respiratory disability (asbestosis) as there is no current evidence of these conditions.

The veteran's claim for a total rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities was denied as his service-connected conditions, in and of themselves, did not render him unable to secure or follow substantially gainful employment.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims for service connection for lung disorder due to asbestos exposure and residuals of cold injury. The claim for service connection for lumbar strain is pending.

The Board found that the veteran does not have asbestosis and denied his claim for service connection.

The Board denied the veteran's application to reopen his claim for service connection for asbestosis, finding that no new and material evidence had been submitted.

The Board found no evidence of mesothelioma or asbestosis in the veteran's service records, and there is no competent medical evidence to support a current diagnosis. As such, the claim for service connection was denied.