RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

 

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY 

CASE NUMBER: PD1200734 SEPARATION DATE: 20020806 

BOARD DATE: 20130219 

 

 

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this 
covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (19D, Cavalry Scout) medically separated for 
asthma. He was treated, but was unable to fully perform his military duties or meet physical 
fitness standards. He was issued a permanent profile and underwent a Medical Evaluation 
Board (MEB). The MEB found his asthma condition medically unacceptable, and referred him 
to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). No other conditions were listed on the DA Form 3947. 
The PEB found the asthma condition unfitting, and rated it 10% IAW the Veterans Affairs 
Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated 
with 10% disability. 

 

 

CI’s CONTENTION: “The VA awarded 30% for this condition.” 

 

 

SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board’s scope of review as defined in DoDI 6040.44 is limited to those 
conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military 
service; or, when requested by the CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be 
unfitting by the PEB.” The unfitting asthma condition meets the criteria prescribed in DoDI 
6040.44, and is accordingly addressed below. No other conditions are within the Board’s 
purview. Any condition outside the Board’s defined scope of review may be eligible for future 
consideration by the Army Board for Corrections of Military Records. 

 

 

RATING COMPARISON: 

 

Army PEB – dated 20020617 

VA (5 mos. Post-Separation) – Effective 20020807 

Condition 

Code 

Rating 

Condition 

Code 

Rating 

Exam 

Asthma 

6602 

10% 

Asthma 

6602 

10%* 

20030114 

.No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. 

Not Service Connected x 4 

20030124 

Combined: 10#% 

Combined: 10% 



 *The VA rating for Asthma was later increased to 30%, by a subsequent VA Rating Decision dated 20090320 

 

 

ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board’s recommendations are premised on severity of conditions at 
the time of separation. The VA ratings which it considers in that regard are those rendered 
most proximate to separation. The Board’s operative instruction, DoDI 6040.44, specifies a 12-
month interval for special consideration to VA findings. This does not mean that the later VA 
evidence was disregarded, but the Board’s recommendations are directed to the severity and 
fitness implications of conditions at the time of separation. 

 

Asthma. In May 2001, the CI developed symptoms of coughing and wheezing. He was seen in 
the Emergency Room and was treated for asthma. Allergy skin testing showed that he was 
allergic to molds and dogs. Treatment with anti-asthma medications caused his symptoms to 


improve. However, in spite of treatment, the CI’s respiratory problems continued and an MEB 
was initiated. His MEB clinical evaluation was at Fort Polk on 11 April 2002. At that time, he 
was being treated with inhaled Albuterol on an “as needed” basis. The CI reported that he was 
using his inhaler about twice a day. Albuterol is a short-acting beta adrenergic agonist, and it 
functions as a bronchodilator. Physical examination (PE) of his lungs was unremarkable, and 
showed no wheezing. Pulmonary function tests (PFTs) were done 9 days earlier and were 
repeated three times, in order to assure accuracy. The CI’s Forced Expiratory Volume in one 
second (FEV-1) was 84-85% of predicted. After bronchodilator, his FEV-1 went up to 88-95% of 
predicted. The PFTs were interpreted as normal spirometry. 

 

In January 2003, 5 months after separation from service, he had a VA Compensation and 
Pension exam. The CI reported that he was using his inhaler up to four times per day. PE was 
normal. There was no wheezing on inspiration, expiration, or forced expiration. Chest X-ray 
was normal. PFTs were normal. The examiner wrote, “The patient apparently has asthma by 
history only with good control and no functional impairment at the present time.” The PFTs in 
the treatment record, which were closest to the date of separation, and which the Board 
weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation, are summarized below. 

 

PFTs 

MEB ~4 mos. Pre-Sep 

(20020402) 

VA ~5 mos. Post-Sep 

(20030114) 

FEV-1 (% Predicted) 

84-85% pre-drug / 88-95% post-drug 

80% 

FEV-1/FVC (%) 

82-84% pre-drug / 85-87% post-drug 

85% 

Details 

 

1st TEST: FEV-1 = 85%; FEV-1/FVC = 83% 

Post-drug: FEV-1 = 95%; FEV-1/FVC = 87% 

CONCL: Spirometry WNL (FEF25-75 went up 33% post drug) 

 

2nd TEST: FEV-1 = 84%; FEV-1/FVC = 82% 

Post-drug: FEV-1 = 88%; FEV-1/FVC = 85% 

CONCL: Spirometry WNL (No change after bronchodilator) 

 

3rd TEST: FEV-1 = 85%; FEV-1/FVC = 84% 

Post-drug: FEV-1 = 90%; FEV-1/FVC = 86% 

CONCL: Spirometry WNL (No change after bronchodilator) 

 

 

 

FVC was 94% of predicted value. 

 

Interpretation was: normal 
spirometry, gas transfer, and total 
lung capacity. Oximetry at rest on 
room air was 99%. 

 

 

§4.97 Rating 

10%* 

10%* 



 * 10% based on inhalational bronchodilator therapy, not the PFT thresholds 

 

The Board carefully reviewed all evidentiary information available, and directs attention to its 
rating recommendation based on the evidence above. Both the Army PEB and the VA coded 
the asthma condition 6602, and rated it 10%. Several years later, the VA increased its asthma 
rating to 30%. In VASRD §4.97, rating guidance for asthma is based on clinical exacerbations, 
type & frequency of medications used, and results of PFTs. Using PFT data in the treatment 
record, the CI’s asthma was essentially non-compensable based on the PFT thresholds for 
diagnostic code 6602 (Asthma, bronchial). However; IAW VASRD §4.97, a 10% rating is 
warranted when there is satisfactory evidence of intermittent inhalational bronchodilator 
therapy. A 30% rating is warranted when there is satisfactory evidence of daily inhalational 
bronchodilator therapy. The crux of the Board’s deliberation centered on the frequency of the 
CI’s inhalational bronchodilator therapy. In the treatment record, there was sparse 
documentation of prescribed anti-asthma medication. The only medication profile available did 
not reflect regular refills of anti-asthma medications. There was no reference to outside 


pharmacy procurement of medications. The Board thus concluded that the CI did not require 
daily asthma treatment on a sustained basis, specifically not at the time of separation. 

 

In April 2002, he was using the albuterol inhaler twice a day. In January 2003, the CI reported 
that he was using his inhaler as often as four times a day. From the evidence in the treatment 
record, the Board concluded that it was more likely than not that the CI was using his inhaler on 
an intermittent “as needed” basis. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and 
mindful of VASRD §4.3 (Resolution of reasonable doubt), the Board recommends by majority 
vote of 2:1 that there be no change in the PEB adjudication for the asthma condition. It is 
appropriately coded 6602, and meets the criteria in VASRD §4.97 for the 10% rating level. 

 

 

BOARD FINDINGS: IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or 
guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were 
inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication. In the matter of the 
asthma condition and IAW VASRD §4.97, the Board recommends by majority vote of 2:1, no 
change in the PEB adjudication. The single voter for dissent (who recommended 30%) did not 
elect to submit a minority opinion. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of 
review for consideration. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of 
the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: 

 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

VASRD CODE 

RATING 

Asthma 

6602 

10% 

COMBINED 

10% 



 

 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20120605, w/atchs 

Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record 

Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 

 

 

 

 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF 

 Acting Director 

 Physical Disability Board of Review 

 


SFMR-RB 


 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency 

(TAPD-ZB / XXXXXXXXXX), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557 

 

SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation 
for XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20130004602 (PD201200734) 

 

 

I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of 
Review (DoD PDBR) recommendation and record of proceedings pertaining to the 
subject individual. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554a, 
I accept the Board’s recommendation and hereby deny the individual’s application. 

This decision is final. The individual concerned, counsel (if any), and any Members of 
Congress who have shown interest in this application have been notified of this decision 
by mail. 

 

 BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: 

 

 

 

 

Encl XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 

 Deputy Assistant Secretary 

 (Army Review Boards)