Citation Nr: 9807243 Decision Date: 03/11/98 Archive Date: 03/25/98 DOCKET NO. 96-50 693 ) DATE ) ) On appeal from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Roanoke, Virginia THE ISSUE Entitlement to service connection for a lung disorder, claimed as secondary to asbestos exposure. REPRESENTATION Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL Appellant ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD L. J. Vecchiollo, Counsel INTRODUCTION The veteran served on active duty from March 1951 to March 1955. This matter comes to the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a October 1996 RO rating decision that denied the veteran’s claim of service connection for a lung disorder, claimed as secondary to asbestos exposure. CONTENTIONS OF APPELLANT ON APPEAL The veteran contends that he has a lung disorder which is attributable to asbestos exposure when he worked in damage control during his active service with the Navy. DECISION OF THE BOARD The Board, in accordance with the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104 (West 1991 & Supp. 1997), has reviewed and considered all of the evidence and material of record in the veteran's claims file. Based on its review of the relevant evidence in this matter, and for the following reasons and bases, it is the decision of the Board that the veteran has not submitted a well-grounded claim for service connection for a lung disorder secondary to asbestos exposure. FINDING OF FACT The veteran’s claim for service connection for a lung disorder secondary to asbestos exposure is implausible. CONCLUSION OF LAW The veteran’s claim for service connection for a lung disorder secondary to asbestos exposure is not well grounded. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a) (West 1991). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION I. Factual Background The veteran served on active duty with the Navy from March 1951 to March 1955. He served aboard the USS Carpellotti. Service medical records show that on entrance medical examination in March 1951, the respiratory system was normal by clinical and X-ray study. On medical examination for discharge performed in March 1955, the veteran's lungs and chest were normal on clinical examination, and a chest X-ray study was negative. The service medical records show no lung disease. Post-service medical records show no lung disease for many years after service. Routine chest X-rays (during examinations for other conditions) were normal; this includes chest X-rays in August 1955, August 1960, January 1966, April 1966, and May 1971. In May 1996, the veteran filed a claim for service connection for a lung disorder caused by exposure to asbestos. He submitted a copy of a 1996 newsletter, for former crew members of the Carpellotti, containing articles on asbestosis and on the Naval Asbestos Victims Association. In August 1996, the RO received the veteran’s response to an RO asbestos questionnaire. He related he was exposed to asbestos in service while working in damage control aboard the Carpellotti. He stated he removed asbestos insulation and replaced it with a compound containing asbestos, which he had mixed. He stated he smoked a pack of cigarettes a day since joining the Navy and ceased smoking in 1991. An August 1996 decision by an Administrative Law Judge shows that the veteran was awarded Social Security Administration disability benefits, effective in 1992, due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The decision notes various medical records showing a diagnosis of COPD beginning in 1991; according to a 1996 medical record, a doctor felt the veteran’s COPD was in the nature of chronic obstructive bronchitis. At a September 1996 VA compensation examination, the veteran gave a history of 30-pack years of smoking and exposure to asbestos in service. He said that in 1991 he was diagnosed as having emphysema and COPD, after which he stopped smoking. On current examination, an X-ray of the chest was normal. Clinical examination of the chest was normal. Spirometry tests could not be interpreted as the veteran was noted to be uncooperative. Chronic obstructive lung disease and alleged exposure to asbestos were diagnosed. The veteran was afforded an RO hearing before a hearing officer in December 1996. He again related his contentions regarding his in-service exposure to asbestos and stated he was not exposed to asbestos before or after service. He testified he began having respiratory problems, such as colds, influenza, bronchial infections, and pneumonia, in the mid to late 1960s and the problems continued thereafter. He indicated COPD was first diagnosed in 1991. He believed that his respiratory problems were due to his in-service exposure to asbestos. II. Legal Analysis Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated by service. 38 U.S.C.A. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. The veteran claims service connection for a lung disorder due to exposure to asbestos during military service. His claim presents the threshold question of whether he has met his initial burden of submitting evidence to show that his claim is well grounded, meaning plausible. If he has not presented evidence that his claim is well grounded, there is no further duty on the part of the VA to assist him with his claim, and the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C.A. § 5107(a); Grivois v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 136 (1994). For the veteran’s claim for service connection to be plausible or well grounded, it must be supported by competent evidence, not just allegations. Tirpak v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 609 (1992). For a service connection claim to be well grounded, it must be supported by competent evidence of a current disability (a medical diagnosis); competent evidence of incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury in service (medical evidence or, in some circumstances, lay evidence); and competent evidence of causality between the in-service disease or injury and the current disability (medical evidence). Caluza v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 498 (1995); Grivois, supra; Grottveit v. Brown, 5 Vet. App. 91 (1993). The Board notes there has been no specific statutory guidance concerning claims for service connection for asbestosis and other asbestos-related diseases, nor has the VA Secretary promulgated any regulations. However, VA Adjudication Procedure Manual (Manual), M21-1, Part VI, Chapter 7, Paragraph 7.21 (Aug. 26, 1996) provides guidelines for considering compensation claims based on exposure to asbestos. According to the Manual provision, inhalation of asbestos fibers can produce fibrosis and tumors, interstitial pulmonary fibrosis (asbestosis) being the most common disease. Asbestos fibers may also produce pleural effusions and fibrosis, pleural plaques, mesotheliomas of pleura and peritoneum, lung cancer, and cancers of the gastrointestinal tract. Cancers of the larynx and pharynx, as well as the urogenital system (except the prostate) are also associated with asbestos exposure. Persons with asbestos exposure have an increased incidence of bronchial, lung, pharyngolaryngeal, gastrointestinal and urogenital cancer. The risk of developing bronchial cancer is increased in current cigarette smokers who have had asbestos exposure. The Manual provision indicates that the clinical diagnosis of asbestosis requires a history of exposure and radiographic evidence of parenchymal disease. See also McGinty v. Brown, 4 Vet. App. 428 (1993). Other than the veteran's statements, there is no evidence associated with the file demonstrating that he was exposed to asbestos material while in service. The veteran’s service medical records are negative for complaints or treatment of a lung disorder, and the post-service medical evidence is entirely negative for a diagnosis of asbestosis, or any other current lung disability commonly associated with exposure to asbestos. Since 1991 the veteran has been diagnosed as having COPD. Even assuming that, as alleged, the veteran was exposed to asbestos during service, for his claim for service connection to be well grounded it would have to be supported by competent medical evidence of causality, linking his current lung condition (COPD, first shown years after service) with asbestos exposure or other incidents of service. Caluza, supra; Grivois, supra; Grottveit, supra. No such medical evidence of causality has been submitted in this case. Although the veteran contends that his lung disorder is related to service, as a layman he is not competent to render an opinion regarding diagnosis or etiology of a disability, and thus his statements in this regard do not serve to make the claim well grounded. Espiritu v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 492 (1992). As no competent medical evidence has been presented showing a current asbestos-related lung disorder, and there is no medical evidence linking any such disorder to service, the claim for service connection is implausible and must be denied as not well grounded. ORDER Service connection for a lung disorder secondary to asbestos exposure is denied. L. W. TOBIN Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals NOTICE OF APPELLATE RIGHTS: Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7266 (West 1991 & Supp. 1997), a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals granting less than the complete benefit, or benefits, sought on appeal is appealable to the United States Court of Veterans Appeals within 120 days from the date of mailing of notice of the decision, provided that a Notice of Disagreement concerning an issue which was before the Board was filed with the agency of original jurisdiction on or after November 18, 1988. Veterans' Judicial Review Act, Pub. L. No. 100-687, § 402, 102 Stat. 4105, 4122 (1988). The date which appears on the face of this decision constitutes the date of mailing and the copy of this decision which you have received is your notice of the action taken on your appeal by the Board of Veterans' Appeals. - 2 -