Citation Nr: 20003633 Decision Date: 01/15/20 Archive Date: 01/15/20 DOCKET NO. 18-16 732 DATE: January 15, 2020 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder, to include as due to asbestos exposure, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for cancer growth on back of tongue, to include as due to asbestos exposure, is remanded. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to asbestos exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran served honorably in the United States Navy from June 1955 to June 1959. These issues come before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a October 2017 rating decision issued by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO). 1. Entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder, to include as due to claimed asbestos exposure. The Veteran contends that his lung disorder is the result of claimed in-service asbestos exposure due to his reported duties as a ship fitter and deep sea salvage diver. Associated with the claims file are medical records which include reference to the presence of asbestosis. It is unclear, however, if any asbestos exposure took place during service or if all exposure occurred post-service. There is evidence of record that the Veteran was exposed to asbestos after discharge. VA has issued guidelines in VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1 addressing adjudicating claims based on asbestos exposure. These guidelines state that the clinical diagnosis of asbestosis requires a history of exposure and radiographic evidence of parenchymal lung disease and establish that VA must determine whether military records demonstrate evidence of asbestos exposure in service and whether there is pre-service and/or post-service evidence of occupational or other asbestos exposure and then make a determination as to the relationship between asbestos exposure and the claimed diseases, keeping in mind the latency and exposure information pertinent to the Veteran. See M21-1 Part IV, subpt. ii, ch. 1, § I.3; M21-1 Part IV, subpt. ii., ch. 2. § C.2. In the current case, VA has not attempted to determine whether the Veteran had in-service asbestos exposure. A remand is required to allow for the development mandated by the M21-1 to verify the Veteran’s potential exposure to asbestos during service and issue a formal finding, with rationale, regarding the likelihood that the Veteran was exposed to asbestos during his active service. 2. Entitlement to service connection for cancer growth on back of tongue, to include as due to asbestos exposure. 3. Entitlement to service connection for prostate cancer, to include as due to asbestos exposure. The Veteran’s tongue cancer and prostate cancer claims are inextricable intertwined with his lung disorder claim. As such, the Board finds that these claims must be remanded as well. See Harris v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 180 (1991) (issues are inextricably intertwined when a decision on one issue would have a significant impact on another issue). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Obtain updated VA and/or private treatment records to the extent possible. If such records are unavailable, the Veteran's claims file must be clearly documented to that effect and the Veteran notified in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.159 (e). 2. Conduct appropriate development, as mandated by the VA Adjudication Procedure Manual M21-1, to verify any potential exposure to asbestos during the Veteran’s service and to determine whether service connection is warranted based on such exposure. A formal finding must be issued regarding the likelihood that the Veteran was exposed to asbestos during his active service. The finding must include a rationale and be associated with the record. (Continued on the next page)   3. Conduct any further evidentiary development as dictated by the results of the development conducted above. G. A. WASIK Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board J.T. Massey, Associate Counsel The Board’s decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential, and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.