Citation Nr: 20005277 Decision Date: 01/23/20 Archive Date: 01/22/20 DOCKET NO. 13-23 806 DATE: January 23, 2020 ORDER Service connection for a lung condition, to include as due to in-service asbestos exposure, is denied. FINDING OF FACT The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that the Veteran has had a lung condition at any time during or approximate to the pendency of the claim. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a lung condition are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131, 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303; Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223 (1992). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the United States Navy from September 1977 to August 1981 and from November 1982 to April 1991, with additional service in the Florida Army National Guard. This matter is before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2010 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in St. Petersburg, Florida. In July 2016, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned. A transcript of the hearing is of record. In July 2017, the Board remanded the issues of service connection for a left knee condition and a lung condition for further development. Thereafter, in a September 2019 rating decision, a VA RO granted service connection for the left knee. The Board finds that this grant of service connection constituted a full award of the benefit sought on appeal with respect to that issue. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d 1156, 1158-59 114 F.3d 1156, 1158-59 (Fed. Cir. 1997) (holding that where an appealed claim for service connection is granted during the pendency of the appeal, a second notice of disagreement must thereafter be timely filed to initiate appellate review of the claim concerning “downstream” issues, such as the compensation level assigned for the disability and the effective date); see also 38 C.F.R. § 19.20. Accordingly, the only issue remaining before the Board is the Veteran’s lung condition claim. Service Connection for a Lung Condition As indicated above in the Conclusions of Law section, the Board finds that service connection for a lung condition, to include as due to in-service asbestos exposure, is not warranted. Thus, the Veteran’s claim is denied. In support of this determination, the Board notes that evidence of a present disability is necessary before service connection may be granted. See Brammer v. Derwinski, 3 Vet. App. 223, 225 (1992) (“Congress specifically limits entitlement to service-connected disease or injury where such cases have resulted in a disability... in the absence of a proof of present disability there can be no claim.”). The requirement of a “current disability” is satisfied if a disorder is diagnosed at the time a claim is filed or at any time during the pendency of the appeal. See McClain v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 319, 321 (2007); see also Romanowsky v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 289, 293 (2013). Here, the Board finds that the Veteran does not have a current lung condition. Specifically, in September 2017, the Veteran was afforded a VA respiratory conditions examination. After reviewing the Veteran’s claims file and conducting a physical examination, the VA examiner stated that there was no objective evidence of a current lung condition. Additionally, the examiner reviewed pulmonary function testing (PFT) results from the date of the examination and found the results to be unremarkable. Similar to the results of the September 2017 VA examination, a review of VA treatment records associated with the claims file indicates a lack of a current respiratory diagnosis. Specifically, VA treatment records from March 2005, May 2007, October 2011, August 2015, November 2015, July 2016, and August 2016 all noted that the Veteran’s lungs were normal. Further, chest x-rays from private provider Dr. Pacheco in December 2009 and from VA in October 2011 revealed no indications of any disease. Lastly, in December 2009, private provider Dr. Matthew stated that there was no clinical or radiological evidence to suggest that the Veteran had any pleural or pulmonary disease. In addition to the above treatment records, the Board also notes that the Veteran has stated multiple times during the claim period that he has not been told by a medical professional that he has a current respiratory diagnosis. Specifically, in October 2010, the Veteran stated that although he was exposed to asbestos on the USS Guadalcanal, he did not currently have a lung condition. Thereafter, in July 2016, the Veteran reported that while he felt that there was something happening with his respiratory system, he did not currently receive any treatment or prescribed medications for any condition. Lastly, in January 2018, the Veteran stated that although he had a cough, there was no evidence indicating that he currently had a lung condition. In conclusion, because the record does not demonstrate a current lung condition, and there is no evidence of any functional impairment resulting from respiratory problems, service connection is not warranted. The Veteran’s claim is denied. (Signature on Next Page) S.C. KREMBS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board N.S. Pettine, 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.