Asbestosis decisions — 2022

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the absence of audiogram results from January 2020 VA treatment, which could affect his hearing loss disability rating.,The Veteran's claim for a higher rating for sleep apnea with asbestosis prior to June 27, 2019 remains denied.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable disability rating for his service-connected scarring of the lungs with pleural plaques consistent with asbestosis is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining VA treatment records and scheduling a new examination.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to conflicting evidence regarding the nature and etiology of the Veteran's current lung disorders, including asbestosis. The VA examiner is requested to clarify whether the Veteran has a current diagnosis of a lung disorder related to his in-service exposure to asbestos.

The Veteran's claim for an increased evaluation for his service-connected pleural plaques with asbestosis, including chest pain, is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a respiratory disorder, including COPD and asbestosis, secondary to asbestos exposure during his military service. The Board found that there was no evidence linking the current respiratory disorders to his active duty.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection for COPD, lupus, and bilateral hearing loss due to unresolved issues regarding exposure to asbestos during active duty for training.

The Board has remanded the claims for an initial disability evaluation and TDIU due to service-connected asbestosis. The claims are being returned for further development, including obtaining private treatment records and a VA examination.

The Board has granted service connection for asbestosis, restrictive/obstructive lung disease, and prostate cancer. The appeal regarding bladder cancer and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) is remanded.

The Board denied service connection for asbestosis and bibasilar pulmonary scarring, finding that the Veteran's current conditions are not related to his military service.

The Veteran's service-connected pulmonary disorder, claimed as asbestosis, was manifested by FVC results of 70% predicted. The Board found that a rating in excess of 30 percent is not warranted.

The Board has remanded the Veteran's claims for respiratory conditions and skin condition due to incomplete medical records and inadequate opinions regarding the nature and etiology of his claimed conditions. The AOJ is instructed to obtain relevant medical records, schedule examinations, and provide a SOC on the hypertension claim.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to insufficient evidence and need for further medical opinions regarding the Veteran's bilateral knee disabilities, lung disability (pleural plaques), and acquired psychiatric disorder (PTSD).

The Board denied a rating in excess of 30 percent for asbestosis from March 15, 2016, finding that the Veteran's symptoms did not meet the criteria for higher ratings based on pulmonary function test results.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding the Veteran's asbestos exposure during service and whether his current respiratory disability is related to that exposure.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder, including post-traumatic stress disorder and schizoaffective disorder, depressive type; chronic sinus and allergy disability; obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD); pseudofolliculitis barbae (PFB); right foot and left foot disabilities; right knee and left knee disabilities; and cervical spine disability have been granted service connection.

The Board has granted service connection for asbestosis, finding that the Veteran's exposure to asbestos during active service is the cause of his current condition.

The Board has granted service connection for asbestosis, finding it related to asbestos exposure during service. Service connection was denied for COPD.

The Veteran's asbestosis is rated at 60 percent, and the Board found that it did not meet the criteria for a higher rating due to lack of evidence showing FVC less than 50% predicted or DLCO (SB) less than 40% predicted.

The Board denied the Veteran's claim for service connection for a respiratory condition, including asbestos exposure, finding that there was no evidence linking his current condition to his military service.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are remanded due to insufficient evidence and need further examination. The respiratory condition claim is related to asbestos exposure, while the right foot condition claim does not have a clear exposure basis.