Opinion ID: 2971825
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Dr. Rasmussen’s opinion

Text: The ALJ determined that Dr. Rasmussen had relied upon the results of his exercise blood-gas study and diffusing capacity study to determine that Martin “was suffering from a pulmonary disability,” but added that, “[s]ignificantly, [Dr. Rasmussen] did not use them to find the existence of pneumoconiosis.” Restating the ALJ’s conclusion, the BRB explained that “Dr. Rasmussen’s diagnosis of coal workers’ pneumoconiosis constitutes a diagnosis of ‘clinical’ pneumoconiosis, not ‘legal’ pneumoconiosis.” But the ALJ failed to adequately explain why Dr. Rasmussen’s report did not support a finding of pneumoconiosis, and the BRB’s explanation that Dr. Rasmussen diagnosed clinical but not legal pneumoconiosis is inaccurate as a matter of law. The BRB’s conclusion that Dr. Rasmussen diagnosed Martin with clinical pneumoconiosis as opposed to legal pneumoconiosis is problematic for two reasons. First, Dr. Rasmussen’s report establishes that Dr. Rasmussen in fact diagnosed Martin with legal pneumoconiosis. Even setting aside Martin’s positive x-ray reading, which the ALJ had already determined to be insufficient to establish No. 03-4646 Martin v. Ligon Preparation Co., et al. Page 4 pneumoconiosis, Dr. Rasmussen’s consideration of the other evidence—including a physical examination of Martin, a diffusing capacity test, arterial blood-gas studies, and Martin’s personal and occupational history—alone would have been sufficient to support a finding of legal pneumoconiosis. See 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4). The second reason is that even if Dr. Rasmussen had diagnosed “only” clinical pneumoconiosis, as the BRB concluded, such a diagnosis would not disqualify Martin from receiving benefits under the BLBA. “[C]linical pneumoconiosis is only a small subset of the compensable afflictions that fall within the definition of legal pneumoconiosis under the Act.” Richardson v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs, 94 F.3d 164, 166 n.2 (4th Cir. 1996). Thus, an individual who has clinical pneumoconiosis necessarily has legal pneumoconiosis as well. See Island Creek Coal Co. v. Compton, 211 F.3d 203, 210 (4th Cir. 2000) (noting that “[l]egal pneumoconiosis is a much broader category of diseases, which includes but is not limited to medical, or ‘coal workers,’ pneumoconiosis”).