Caring. Effective. Efficient.

Proving asbestos exposure in military service in a DIC appeal.

Proving asbestos exposure in military service in a DIC appeal.

This case involves the failure of the Board of Veterans Appeals to address all evidence related to the Veteran’s possible exposure to asbestos in military service when it denied service connection for the cause of the veteran’s death. 

Our client appealed the BVA’s decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims (CAVC).

The appeal was resolved through a joint motion for remand: the government attorney agreed with Alexandra Curran’s arguments that the Board failed to address all relevant evidence of in-service asbestos exposure.


This appeal involved the BVA's failure to address all relevant evidence as it related to the veteran’s cause of death. 

Based on an alleged lack of evidence and the veteran’s military occupational specialty, the Board determined that the veteran did not establish in-service exposure to asbestos in his VA claim.

As a result, the BVA denied service connection of the cause of the veteran's death, preventing his surviving spouse from receiving disability compensation in the form of Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC). DIC and accrued benefits are two of the most common benefits sought by a veteran's surviving spouse, but they are certainly not the only such benefits.

Service connection for cause of death may be granted if a service-connected condition was either the principal or contributory cause of the veteran's death. 

A principal cause of death means that the service-connected condition was the immediate or underlying cause of the death. A contributory cause of death means that the condition contributed materially or substantially to the death or aided in the death.

The veteran’s death was caused by chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), lung cancer and brain cancer. His surviving spouse sought service connection for the cause of his death due to in-service asbestos exposure. 

While most cases involving asbestos exposure in military service involve navy veterans, veterans from other branches of the military were exposed to asbestos.

The Board held that the veteran was not exposed to asbestos in military service, explaining that the veteran’s wife did not have personal knowledge of the exposure and relying on his military occupational specialty of truck driver.

However, the Board failed to address three pieces of important evidence: 1) his wife’s statement that her husband talked about performing repair work on the trucks he drove while in the military; 2) the Veteran’s DD 214 that listed auto mechanic training; and 3) an article explaining reasons for high risk of asbestos exposure in the automotive industry.

Ms. Curran argued that the BVA erred in failing to address this evidence regarding possible exposure to asbestos.   


The Secretary agreed that the Board of Veterans Appeals erred when it provided an inadequate statement of reasons or bases to support its determination that the veteran was not exposed to asbestos in military service, since the BVA did not address all the evidence of record related to his possible in-service exposure.

The parties identified at least 3 pieces of evidence that related to the veteran's possible exposure to asbestos in military service, and (among other things) directed the BVA to address that evidence on remand.

The Veteran and the VA’s Office of General Counsel filed a joint motion to vacate and remand the appeal back to the Board to fix its errors.

If the BVA decision in this case sounds like yours, or if you have a BVA decision that involves clear and unmistakeable error, reach out to the law firm of Attig | Steel.

Click here to submit your BVA decision and one of our attorneys will see if there is anything we can do to help.

Link to the BVA Decision on CAVC Website.

Link to the Joint Motion to Remand the CAVC Website.

Case Details

OGC Attorney: Sarah Catherine Blackadar (link to attorney bio on LinkedIn)

Veteran Representation at CAVC: Alexandra Curran (link to bio)

Board of Veterans Appeals Veterans Law Judge: K. Parakkal

Vet's Rep at BVA: pro-se

Date of BVA Decision: June 21, 2018

Date of CAVC Judgment on Remand: May 10, 2019

Recent Cases

This case involves involves an Air Force veteran (2000, 2003 – 2004) and his appeal to the BVA seeking a rating above 50% for his service-connected PTSD due to suicidal ideation and total occupational and social impairment. The appeal was resol… Read More
This case involves a the resolution of a veteran’s appeal to the BVA by way of a joint motion to remand. The veteran had been claiming service connection for a psychiatric condition and total disability based on individual unemployability (TDIU).… Read More
This case involves a US Navy veteran’s (1966 to 1981)  appeal to the BVA seeking  seeking service connection for his Parkinson’s disease and Type 2 Diabetes based on exposure to Agent Orange during his service in the Philippines and Gua… Read More

See More Appellate Results

Taking Point! Blog

In November 2020, a panel of judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals Veterans Claims issued a precedential opinion in Holmes v. Wilkie.   In it, the Court laid out a road map for Veterans trying to get the correct VA rating for migraines… Read More
By: Yalitza Ledgister, writing for “The Bridge” Single mothers! The poem “The Hill We Climb” recited by Amanda Gorman during the Inauguration on January 20th, 2021 was also written for you. It was created and articulated by a br… Read More
As we approach Black History Month and Women’s History Month, I am presented with an opportunity to write about a Black woman.  So, I chose me!  I am an Afro-Latina who also identifies as Black. On my census bureau application last y… Read More
Dear Veteran, We the People, the 79.8 million of us, voted that temporary economic stability should not come at the expense of Black, Hispanic, frontline workers, the immuno-compromised, and elderly lives. We demanded that the unity of our country m… Read More

Read the "Taking Point!" Blog