Citation Nr: 21014656 Decision Date: 03/15/21 Archive Date: 03/15/21 DOCKET NO. 18-03 064 DATE: March 15, 2021 REMANDED Entitlement to service connection for a pulmonary disability, claimed as the result of asbestos exposure, is remanded. REASONS FOR REMAND The Veteran had active service from December 1971 to November 1972. Entitlement to service connection for a pulmonary disability, claimed as the result of asbestos exposure, is remanded. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has conceded that there is a high probability that the Veteran was exposed to asbestos while performing his military duties. A March 1999 written statement from D. Gaziano, M.D., conveys that the Veteran was diagnosed with asbestosis and bilateral interstitial lung disease. A September 1999 written statement from M. Alexander, M.D., indicates that the Veteran exhibited radiological findings consistent with “non-specific interstitial prominence.” VA’s duty to assist includes, in appropriate cases, the duty to conduct a thorough and contemporaneous medical examination which is accurate and fully descriptive. McLendon v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 79 (2006); Green v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 121, 124 (1991). When VA undertakes to obtain an evaluation, it must ensure that the evaluation is adequate. Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 312 (2007). A January 2021 addendum pulmonary opinion conducted for VA states that “the medical record indicates a diagnosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease from 8/21/18 that is corroborated by pulmonary function testing;” “the medical record also indicates a diagnosis of asbestosis, yet there is no definitive clinical evidence to support this;” and “it is apparent that the diagnosis may have been propagated via an ongoing but unverified problem list or simply the term, interstitial on chest X ray, which have not shown any characteristics of asbestosis.” The Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) concludes that such comments are indicative of the need for further VA pulmonary evaluation. Clinical documentation dated after January 2021 is not of record. VA should obtain all relevant VA and private treatment records which could potentially be helpful in resolving the Veteran’s claim. Murphy v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 78 (1990); Bell v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 611 (1992). The matters are REMANDED for the following action: 1. Ask the Veteran to complete a VA Form 21-4142 for each private healthcare provider who has treated him for any pulmonary disabilities. Make two requests for the authorized records from all identified healthcare providers unless it is clear after the first request that a second request would be futile. 2. Associate with the record any VA clinical documentation for treatment provided after January 2021 not already of record. 3. Schedule the Veteran for a VA pulmonary examination conducted by a medical doctor to ascertain the nature of any identified pulmonary disability and any relationship to active service. The examiner must review the record, including the March 1999 written statement from D. Gaziano, M.D., and the September 1999 written statement from M. Alexander, M.D., and should note that review in the report. The examiner should: (a) Identify all pulmonary disabilities found. If asbestosis is not diagnosed, the examiner should specifically state that fact. (b) Opine whether it is at least as likely as not (50 percent or greater probability) that any identified pulmonary disability had its onset during active service or is related to any incident of service, including the Veteran’s conceded in service asbestos exposure. All opinions advanced should be reconciled with the other opinions of record, including those of Drs. Gaziano and Alexander. J. T. HUTCHESON Acting Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board C. Ivan Franklin 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.