Citation Nr: 20006798 Decision Date: 01/28/20 Archive Date: 01/27/20 DOCKET NO. 14-31 471A DATE: January 28, 2020 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory condition is granted. FINDING OF FACT It is at least as likely as not that the Veteran’s respiratory condition is etiologically related to his service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for a respiratory condition have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102, 3.303 (2019). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty in the U.S. Navy from January 1969 to March 1969 and had active duty for training (ACDUTRA) from June 4, 1967 to June 16, 1967; August 6, 1967 to August 18, 1967; and July 14, 1968 to July 17, 1968. In December 2018, the Board remanded the issue of entitlement to service connection for a respiratory condition for further development, including for a VA examination and opinion. Entitlement to service connection for a respiratory condition is granted. The Veteran contends his respiratory condition was caused by in-service exposure to asbestos, chemical solvent, and second-hand smoke. Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by active service. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1131, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The three-element test for service connection requires evidence of: (1) a current disability; (2) in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) a causal relationship between the current disability and the in-service disease or injury. Shedden v. Principi, 381 F.3d 1163, 1166-67 (Fed. Cir. 2004). Service connection may also be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disease was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d). When there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, the Secretary shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). First, the evidence shows a current disability. Specifically, a March 2018 VA examiner noted the Veteran was diagnosed with asthma. Furthermore, a private physician provided the Veteran was seen at the clinic for bronchial asthma reactive airway. See September 2018 Medical Treatment Record – Non-Government Facility, p. 1. The first element of service connection is satisfied. Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1166-67. Second, with regard to the in-service element, the Veteran has credibly testified that he was aboard the U.S.S. Brewster, and he slept under a pipe where dust and particles were falling on him. See January 2017 Hearing Transcript, p. 7. He also dealt with maintenance on the U.S.S. Baltic, where sandblasting occurred and he used chemical solvent when cleaning. See id. at 8. Therefore, the Board gives the Veteran the benefit of the doubt and finds the second element of service connection is satisfied. Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1166-67. The remaining question is whether there is a medical nexus between the Veteran’s currently diagnosed respiratory condition and his service. As to this matter, the evidence conflicts. The Veteran underwent a VA examination in March 2018. The Veteran reported he visited his physician seven to eight times a year for asthma flareups, and he used inhalational anti-inflammatory medication daily and Ipratropium-albuterol nebulizer twice daily. He also used antibiotics approximately six times a year. The March 2018 examiner opined that it was less likely as not the Veteran’s asthma was related to service. She noted there was no evidence the Veteran was treated for an asthma condition during service or post-service, except for an April 2015 statement from Dr. R. T. E. She explained that the Veteran did not have a diagnosis of asbestosis and that asthma was not a disorder associated with asbestos exposure. She further explained that breathing in noxious air causes immediate twitching or spasm and obstruction of airways, which only occurs at the time of the inhalation of the noxious air. That is, it is an immediate reaction and not due to something that stays in the system for weeks, months or years and will cause asthmatic symptoms. Dr. R. T. E. provided two private opinions in April 2015 and July 2018. He opined that the Veteran’s bronchial asthma reactive airway had a 50 percent or greater probability of being related to the Veteran’s service. He noted that the Veteran dealt with respiratory issues since service when he was exposed to asbestos, sandblasting, and cleaning solvents on a ship. After careful consideration, the Board finds that the evidence regarding nexus is at least in equipoise. When the evidence for and against a claim is in relative equipoise, the Board has an obligation to resolve all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran. See 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that the third element of service connection is established. See Shedden, 381 F.3d at 1166-67. As all three elements of service connection are met, service connection for a respiratory condition is warranted. A. S. CARACCIOLO Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board T. L. Park, 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.