Asbestosis decisions — 2023

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to inconsistencies in the evidence and need for additional testing. The Veteran's asbestosis with COPD and right pulmonary nodule is currently rated at 30 percent, but his symptoms have not met or approximated the criteria for a higher rating under Diagnostic Code 6604.

The Veteran's asbestosis was granted an increased rating to 30 percent effective January 8, 2018. The appeal is for the effective date of this decision.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including asbestosis, asthma, COPD, lumbar spine degenerative arthritis, radiculopathy, and bilateral hearing loss, have prevented him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation since March 2005. The Board has granted an extraschedular TDIU for the period from March 22, 2005 to April 22, 2019.

The Veteran's appeals for service connection for arthritis, asbestosis, and heart condition have been withdrawn. The appeal for diabetes mellitus is remanded due to the need for further development regarding herbicide exposure.

The Board has dismissed all appeals related to service connection for various conditions as the Veteran requested withdrawal of these appeals prior to a decision being made.

The Board has remanded the claims for emphysema, COPD, and asbestosis due to inadequate etiological opinions. The Veteran's service connection claim is being remanded for further development.

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

The Board has granted an initial 30 percent disability rating for service-connected pulmonary asbestosis, based on the consistent FVC results throughout the appeal period.

The Veteran's asbestosis is granted a 100% rating, effective from the date of the decision. The issue of entitlement to TDIU prior to March 13, 2020 is dismissed as moot.

The Board denied service connection for asbestosis and COPD, finding no current diagnosis of asbestosis and insufficient evidence to establish a relationship between COPD and the Veteran's in-service asbestos exposure.

The Veteran's children are not eligible for accrued benefits as the appellant is not a valid claimant due to her age and status.

The Veteran's asbestosis is rated at 30 percent prior to October 4, 2015 and at 60 percent thereafter. The Board denied a higher rating based on the current severity of his service-connected asbestosis.

The Veteran's asbestosis, diagnosed as pleural plaquing with COPD, has been rated at 30 percent since May 1, 2017. The VA determined that the evidence does not support a higher rating based on current pulmonary function test results.

The Board has decided to remand the Veteran's claims for service connection for asbestosis and silicosis due to inadequate VA examination. The case will be reviewed again with a new examination.

The Veteran's knee and spine conditions are remanded for further examination. His respiratory, heart, diabetes, and peripheral neuropathy disabilities are also remanded due to the similar nature of the issues.

The Veteran's anxiety disability and hypertension are granted service connection, while his asbestosis is denied. The case for hypertension remains pending.

The Board has remanded the claims for an acquired psychiatric disorder, an acquired respiratory condition, and diabetes mellitus type II due to potential service connection based on in-service exposure. The Veteran's reported incidents aboard USS Hornet are to be verified, a VA examination is needed for his respiratory condition, and a VA medical opinion is required regarding secondary service connection.

The Board has granted service connection for COPD, but denied service connection for asbestosis.

The Board has granted service connection for asbestos-related lung disease and COPD, as well as vasovagal syncope, both of which are linked to the Veteran's in-service exposure to asbestos. The decision is based on direct service connection.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to inadequate medical opinion and failure to address post-service employment exposure.