The Veteran's service-connected asbestosis resulted in post-bronchodilator pulmonary function tests (PFTs) that reflected a Forced Vital Capacity (FVC) of 59 to 73 percent and Diffusion Capacity of the Lung for Carbon Monoxide by the Single Breath Method (DLCO (SB)) of 46 to 52 percent, without evidence of cor pulmonale, pulmonary hypertension, or outpatient oxygen therapy. The Board found that an increased disability rating in excess of 60 percent is not warranted.
The deciding factor: The post-bronchodilator results did not meet the criteria for a higher rating as they were within the range of 50- to 80-percent predicted FVC and DLCO (SB).
- Claimed conditions
- Asbestosis
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 60%
- Decision date
- October 13, 2020
- Citation
- 20066275
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Denied
The Board denied service connection for asbestosis, bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), rhinitis, sinusitis, and asthma. The Veteran's bilateral hearing loss was also denied a compensable rating.
- Granted
The Board granted an effective date of August 26, 2010 for the award of a 30 percent evaluation for COPD, asbestosis, and lung cancer.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for an initial compensable disability rating for bilateral hearing loss and an initial disability rating in excess of 10 percent for asbestosis, while remanding a claim for service connection for coronary artery disease.
- Dismissed
The appeal for service connection for chronic fatigue syndrome, sleep disturbance, and compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 for cervical spine nerve damage to include residual surgical scars was dismissed due to a procedural defect in the notice of disagreement. The claim for asbestosis was denied due to lack of evidence supporting a current disability.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.