Asbestosis decisions — 2009

The Board found that the Veteran's asbestosis did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under VA disability evaluation criteria, and thus denied his claim for an initial compensable evaluation.

The Board found that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and tinnitus are not related to service, but his respiratory disorder (claimed as residuals of asbestos exposure) is related to active duty service.

The Veteran's asbestosis was rated at 10% from July 29, 2004 until June 6, 2005. From June 7, 2005 onwards, the disability warranted a 30% evaluation.

The Veteran's appeal has been remanded for additional development, including issuance of a more comprehensive VCAA notice letter and scheduling of a videoconference hearing.

The Board found that the Veteran's asbestosis was not present in service or until many years thereafter and is not related to service. Therefore, the claim for service connection for asbestosis has been denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's asbestosis is related to service and grants entitlement to service connection.

The Veteran seeks TDIU based on service-connected asbestosis and arthritis. The Board has determined that a VA examination is needed to assess the impact of these disabilities on his employability.

The VA determined that the veteran's asbestosis does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation under the applicable rating schedule.

The Veteran's service-connected asbestosis is rated at a 10 percent disability rating, and the evidence does not support an increase in this rating.

The Board previously denied the claim of entitlement to service connection for asbestosis on the merits. The Court set aside this decision and remanded the case for further development, including scheduling a VA respiratory examination by a board-certified pulmonologist.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for dermatographia and asbestosis were denied. The claim for dermatographia was reopened, but the new evidence did not establish a current disability that is related to service.

The Veteran's asbestosis has not met the criteria for a compensable disability rating based on Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) or Diffusion Capacity of the Lung for Carbon Monoxide by the Single Breath Method (DLCO(SB)) being within the range of 75-80% predicted or 66-80% predicted, respectively.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for asbestosis of the left lung, carcinoma of the bladder, and carcinoma of the prostate due to a lack of evidence linking these conditions to his military service.

The Veteran is seeking service connection for chronic asbestosis, which he claims was caused by his inservice asbestos exposure. The claim will be remanded to obtain additional medical records and a VA examination.

The Board found that any lung problems during service were acute and transitory, and did not result in residual disability. The Veteran's current lung disorder began years after service and was not caused by any incident of service, including asbestos exposure.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional development, including a VA pulmonary examination.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of asbestosis and therefore, service connection for this condition is denied.

The Board found that the Veteran's respiratory disabilities other than asbestosis were not incurred or aggravated by his military service, and are not proximately due to or the result of his service-connected asbestosis. The claim for an initial rating in excess of 10% for asbestosis was also denied.

The Board found no evidence of asbestos exposure during service and denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for lung disorders, bilateral hearing loss, and tinnitus. The claim for silicosis was also denied.

The Veteran's service-connected asbestosis results in a forced vital capacity (FVC) of 86 percent predicted and a diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide by the single breath method (DLCO(SB)) of 56 percent predicted prior to September 7, 2007. The Board finds that an initial rating in excess of 30 percent is not warranted.