Opinion ID: 1252614
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Legal and Clinical Definitions of Pneumoconiosis

Text: First, there is absolutely no issue here that Mr. Hill suffered from pneumoconiosis, nor is there any dispute that that condition resulted from his employment in mines. The ALJ's opinion even notes that [T]he parties stipulated that the miner, Charles W. Hill, had a coal mine employment history of 9½ years and that Claimant established that the miner had pneumoconiosis arising out of his coal mine employment. App. at 28. Moreover, Mr. Hill's breathing difficulties and the changes in his respiratory system were documented by the testimony of Mrs. Hill, as well as medical records and the deposition testimony of Dr. Carey as summarized above. For reasons that are neither apparent, nor explainable, the ALJ stressed that Dr. Carey did not specifically state that pneumoconiosis contributed to or hastened Hill's death. Instead, Dr. Carey used the terms chronic lung disease or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. That is a distinction without a difference; it ignores the definition of pneumoconiosis, codified in the applicable regulations. As we noted earlier, pneumoconiosis is defined as a chronic dust disease of the lung and its sequelae, including respiratory and pulmonary impairments, arising out of coal mine employment. 20 C.F.R. § 718.201(a). The legal definition of pneumoconiosis (i.e. any lung disease that is significantly related to, or substantially aggravated by, dust exposure in coal mine employment) is much broader than the medical definition, which only encompasses lung diseases caused by fibrotic reaction of lung tissue to inhaled dust. Labelle, 72 F.3d at 312 (emphasis added). The legal definition therefore includes any chronic restrictive or obstructive pulmonary disease, arising out of coal mine employment. 20 C.F.R. § 718.201(a). Dr. Carey's description of the condition that caused Mr. Hill's death falls squarely within the regulatory definition of pneumoconiosis. [6] Rather than seizing upon a semantic technicality to reject Dr. Carey's explanation of the causes of Hill's death, the ALJ should have recognized that Dr. Carey was stating that pneumoconiosis, as defined under the Black Lung Benefits Act, was a cause of, and a hastening factor in, his death. The Board's order affirming the ALJ's decision is equally as puzzling with respect to its treatment of the legal and clinical definitions of pneumoconiosis. The Board stated the following in explaining why Dr. Carey's opinion was properly dismissed by the ALJ: Dr. Carey did not make a finding of clinical pneumoconiosis, and as he did not state that his finding of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease/chronic lung disease is related to coal mine employment (legal pneumoconiosis), the administrative law judge properly found the opinion insufficient to establish that the miner's death was due to pneumoconiosis. BRB Decision at 5. However, there is absolutely no issue here about whether Hill's pneumoconiosis is related to coal mine employment. Hill had been receiving benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act for nearly ten years before he died, and even if he had not received those benefits, the causal relationship between his coal mine employment and pneumoconiosis was stipulated to before the ALJ. Dr. Carey may, or may not, have been in a position to render an opinion about the cause of Hill's pneumoconiosis, but it should have been obvious that he did not have to. The issue here is what caused Hill's death, not what caused his pneumoconiosis.