09-09 110, 09-09 110

Veteran served on active duty Oct 1969–Aug 1972 and filed a VA Form 21-526 received Oct 18, 2001 indicating claim for asbestos-related disability (asbestosis) and related cardiac conditions.
VA granted service connection for asbestosis in a July 2010 decision with an initial effective date of Nov 26, 2007; Veteran appealed.
Board in March 2014 assigned an effective date of June 6, 2002 after a Nov 2012 hearing and reliance in part on a June 2013 VHA specialist opinion.
Parties filed a Joint Motion for Partial Remand (JMR) and the Court vacated the March 2014 Board decision as to the effective date; matter returned to the Board in Apr 2016.
Medical evidence is mixed: a June 2013 VHA specialist found probable pleural asbestos manifestation as early as 2002; earlier films (1996–1997) show minimal/right-sided pleural thickening per other reviewers.
Board found the October 18, 2001 filing, liberally construed, constituted the claimant’s date of claim and that evidence was in equipoise as to manifestation before that date, so assigned an effective date of Oct 18, 2001.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Proper effective date for service connection for asbestosis	Oct 18, 2001 (date of VA Form 21-526)	Earlier dates not supported; evidence does not clearly show manifestation before claim	Effective date granted: Oct 18, 2001 (no earlier)
Whether the Oct 18, 2001 filing constitutes a claim	Form should be liberally construed as a claim for asbestosis	VA implicitly accepted form as claim but had assigned later effective dates	Board held Oct 18, 2001 is the date of claim
Whether pre-claim medical evidence establishes manifestation (entitlement earlier than claim)	Medical records and expert opinion show pleural changes possibly related to asbestos before 2001	Other examinations describe only minimal/right pleural thickening, creating doubt	Evidence is in equipoise; tie goes to claimant, but cannot establish earlier effective date than Oct 18, 2001
Application of VA regulatory standard when evidence is in equipoise	Claimant benefits from doubt doctrine when evidence is balanced	VA must evaluate medical evidence and apply 38 C.F.R. § 3.400 timing rules	Board applied rule: effective date is date of claim because manifestation before that date was not established

DeLisio v. Shinseki, 25 Vet. App. 45 (Vet. App. 2011) (effective date generally is later of claim receipt or date entitlement arose)
EF v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 324 (Vet. App. 1991) (VA must liberally construe filings to identify claims)