Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00374
Original file (PD-2012-00374.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
    BRANCH OF SERVICE:  ARMY 

DATE OF PLACEMENT ON TDRL:  20050502 

 
NAME:  XXXXXXX 
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200374 
BOARD DATE:  20121128                                     DATE OF PERMANENT SEPARATION:  20070221 
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered individual (CI) was an active duty PV2/E‐2 (92G10/Food Service Specialist), medically 
separated for asthma.  The CI developed dyspnea on exertion during basic training in August 
2003.  By November 2004, he had failed every PT test administered, carried the diagnosis of 
asthma  and  was  being  treated  with  oral  and  inhaled  medications.    The  CI  did  not  improve 
adequately  with  treatment  to  meet  the  physical  requirements  of  his  Military  Occupational 
Specialty  or  satisfy  physical  fitness  standards.    He  was  issued  a  permanent  P3  profile  and 
referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).  The MEB identified and forwarded asthma as 
the only condition for Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication.  The PEB adjudicated the 
asthma condition as unfitting, rated 30% and placed the CI on the Temporary Disability Retired 
List  (TDRL).    Approximately  2  years  later,  the  PEB  adjudicated  the  CI’s  asthma  as  sufficiently 
stable and rated it 10% with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities 
(VASRD).  The CI appealed the ruling and the US Army Physical Disability Agency reviewed the 
case and concluded it was properly adjudicated by the PEB.  The CI was medically separated 
with a 10% disability rating. 
 
 
CI CONTENTION:  “My disability in which I occured (sic) during service has not left and I am still 
suffering from my Asthma.” 
 
 
SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board wishes to clarify that the scope of its review as defined in DoDI 
6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e. (2) 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 ratings 
for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases.  The asthma condition as requested for 
consideration meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview; and, is addressed 
below,  in  addition  to  a  review  of  the  ratings  for  the  unfitting  condition.  Any  conditions  or 
contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of 
review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military 
Records. 
 
 
TDRL RATING COMPARISON: 
 

Service IPEB – Dated 20070129

VA – All Effective Date 20111213 

Condition on TDRL entry 

20050502 
Asthma 

Code 
6602 

Rating

TDRL
30%

Sep.
10%

Condition 
Asthma

Code 
6602

Rating 
30% 

Exam 

20120113
20120113

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

↓No Addi(cid:415)onal MEB/PEB Entries↓

Combined:  10% 

Combined:  30% 

 
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  The Board acknowledges the sentiment expressed in the CI’s application 
regarding  the  significant  impairment  with  which  his  service‐incurred  condition  continues  to 

burden  him.    The  Board  wishes  to  clarify  that  it  is  subject  to  the  same  laws  for  disability 
entitlements as those under which the Disability Evaluation System (DES) operates.  The DES 
has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity 
or  potential  complications  of  conditions  resulting  in  medical  separation.    That  role  and 
authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA), operating under 
a  different  set  of  laws  (Title  38,  United  States  Code).    The  Board  evaluates  DVA  evidence 
proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating 
the  fairness  of  DES  fitness  decisions  and  rating  determinations  for  disability  at  the  time  of 
separation.    It  is  noted  for  the  record  that  the  Board  recognizes  the  significant  interval  (59 
months) between the date of separation and the DVA evaluation. DoDI 6040.44, under which 
the Board operates, specifies a 12‐month interval for special consideration to VA findings.  This 
does  not  mean  that  the  DVA  information  was  disregarded,  as  it  was  a  valuable  source  for 
clinical information and opinions relevant to the Board’s evaluation.  In matters germane to the 
severity and disability at the time of separation, however, the information in the record was 
assigned  proportionately  more  probative  value  as  a  basis 
for  the  Board’s  rating 
recommendations. 
 
Asthma Condition.  There were three pulmonary function test (PFTs) results in evidence, with 
documentation of additional ratable criteria, which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating 
recommendation; as summarized in the chart below. 
 

TDRL re‐eval 6 Mos. Pre‐Sep. 

VA 59 Mos. Post‐Sep 

Pulmonary Function Tests 

FEV1 % Predicted 

FEV1/FVC 

Meds 

NARSUM 2 Mos. Pre‐TDRL 

entry 
93% 
80% 

Post Bronchodilator PFT 

Albuterol as needed 

Advair daily 

§4.97 Rating 

30% (daily Advair) 

82% 
75% 

Pre‐Bronchodilator PFT 

Rare Albuterol use 

Advair daily 

Singulair stopped by CI

30% (daily Advair) 

78% 
67% 

Pre‐Bronchodilator PFT 

Albuterol daily 
Advair daily 

30% (daily Advair) 

 
The narrative summary (NARSUM) prepared approximately 3 months prior to TDRL entry noted 
progressive  worsening  of  shortness  of  breath  during  physical  activity  during  basic  training  in 
November 2004 at which time the CI had bronchitis.  Treatment of the bronchitis along with 
use  of  bronchodilators  did  not  resolve  the  shortness  of  breath  which  continued  thoughout 
Advanced Infantry Training where he failed his physical fitness test.  In May 2004, the CI was 
evaluated  in  a  pulmonary  clinic  where  he  underwent  a  Methacholine  challenge  test  that 
revealed mild obstruction at baseline with moderate airway hyperactivity.  He was treated with 
Advair and a 5‐day course of oral steroids which failed to improve his symptoms.  The CI also 
underwent an exercise stress test that was consistent with asthma and a laryngoscopic exam 
ruled out vocal cord dysfunction (VCD).  His symptoms occurred with any exertion, hot or cold 
weather  and  with  wearing  his  gas  mask.    Physical  exam  revealed  clear  lungs  with  good  air 
movement.    PFTs  are  documented  in  the  chart  above.    At  the  MEB  exam  prepared 
approximately  2  months  prior  to  TDRL  entry,  the  CI  reported  asthma  triggered  by  running, 
temperature changes, any physical work and that he wheezes at night.  The MEB physical exam 
noted normal lung exam. 
 
At TDRL entry, the PEB adjudicated the CI’s asthma condition using VASRD code 6602, Asthma, 
and rated it 30% based on daily medication use.  This is consistent with VASRD rating guidelines 
granting  a  30%  evaluation  for  normal  PFTs  and  daily  use  of  inhaled  anti‐inflammatory 
medication.  The next higher rating, 60%, requires abnormal PTFs, or; at least monthly visits to a 
physician for required care of exacerbations, or; intermittent (at least three per year) courses of 
systemic (oral or parenteral) corticosteroids.  These conditions were not met in this case.  After 

   2                                                           PD1200374 
 

due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), 
the  Board  concluded  that  there  was  insufficient  cause  to  recommend  a  change  in  the  PEB 
adjudication at TDRL entry for the asthma condition. 
 
The CI had a TDRL re‐evaluation approximately 6 months prior to final separation.  That exam 
documented “zero emergency room visits and zero hospitalizations for his asthma.”  Albuterol 
use was very rare and he was “only using his Advair inhaler once daily in the morning.”  The CI 
had self‐discontinued his Singulair.  His lungs were clear to auscultation bilaterally with good air 
movement.  Pertinent PFT results are summarized in the chart above.  His frequent nocturnal 
symptoms were likely related to the fact that he was not using an evening dose of Advair.  It 
was  recommend  that  he  use  his  Advair  inhaler  twice  a  day  and  continue  to  use  his  rescue 
Albuterol inhaler.  The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed 59 months after 
final  separation  documented  the  following  pertinent  items:  Albuterol  use  three  times  daily, 
Advair use once daily, no work lost due to asthma and no asthma flare‐ups in the past year.  
Pertinent PFT results are summarized in the chart above. 
 
The  Board  directs  attention  to  its  rating  recommendation  based  on  the  above  evidence.    At 
final  separation,  the  PEB  applied  VASRD  code  6602,  asthma,  and  rated  it  10%  based  on 
“intermittent  use  of  inhaler.”    The  PEB  proceedings  document  further  noted  “no  evidence 
submitted supporting daily use of medication (no medication profile was submitted).”  The VA 
also utilized VASRD code 6602, asthma, and rated it 30% presumably based on the daily use of 
Advair as reported in the VA C&P examination.  Rating criteria for VASRD code 6602 are based 
on PFT results, medication use and frequency of provider visits for exacerbations.  Proximal to 
separation, the CI had  non‐compensable PFT  results, did not have any asthma exacerbations 
and did not require any systemic steroid use.  Therefore, he does not meet criteria for the 60%, 
rating so deliberations settled on a 10% vs. 30% discussion.  Although the TDRL re‐evaluation 
exam  6  months  prior  to  separation  documented  daily  Advair  use,  the  PEB’s  proceedings 
document suggested they required a medication profile be submitted as proof of medication 
use  required  to  meet  the  30%  rating  threshold.    In  requesting  a  Formal  PEB  hearing,  the  CI 
submitted a rebuttal letter with two key points, first, he was taking Advair on a daily basis and 
secondly,  he  attempted  to  get  a  medication  profile  but  was  unsuccessful.    All  three  of  the 
formal history and physical exam documents pertaining to asthma document the CIs daily use 
of inhaled anti‐inflammatory medication.  The VA C&P examination performed approximately 
59 months after final separation also documented daily Advair use however, was too remote 
from  separation  to  be  of  any  probative  value  for  rating  purposes.    After  due  deliberation, 
considering  all  of  the  evidence  and  mindful  of  VASRD  §4.3  (reasonable  doubt),  the  Board 
recommends a final disability rating of 30% for the asthma condition. 
 
 
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.    The  Board  did  not 
surmise  from  the  record  or  PEB  ruling  in  this  case  that  any  prerogatives  outside  the  VASRD 
were exercised.  In the matter of the asthma condition, the Board unanimously recommends a 
final disability rating of 30%, coded 6602 IAW VASRD §4.97.  There were no other conditions 
within the Board’s scope of review for consideration. 
 
 

 

   3                                                           PD1200374 
 

RECOMMENDATION:  The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as 
follows;  and,  that  the  discharge  with  severance  pay  be  recharacterized  to  reflect  permanent 
disability retirement, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation: 
 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

VASRD CODE 

6602

COMBINED

RATING

PERMANENT

30%
30%

Asthma 

 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20120416, w/atchs 
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record 
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
SFMR‐RB 
 

 
 

 

 

 

          XXXXXXXXXX, DAF 
           President 
           Physical Disability Board of Review 

 
 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency  

(TAPD‐ZB / XXXXXX), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA  22202‐3557 

SUBJECT:  Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation  

For XXXXXXXX, AR20120022681 (PD201200374) 

1.  Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554(a), I approve the enclosed 
recommendation of the Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) 
pertaining to the individual named in the subject line above to recharacterize the individual’s 
separation as a permanent disability retirement with the combined disability rating of 30% 
effective the date of the individual’s original medical separation for disability with severance 

pay.   

2.  I direct that all the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected 

accordingly no later than 120 days from the date of this memorandum: 

 

a.  Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the 

individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the 

original medical separation for disability with severance pay. 

 

b.  Providing orders showing that the individual was retired with permanent disability 

effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay. 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

   4                                                           PD1200374 
 

 
c.  Adjusting pay and allowances accordingly.  Pay and allowance adjustment will 
account for recoupment of severance pay, and payment of permanent retired pay at 30% 

effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay. 

 

d.  Affording the individual the opportunity to elect Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and 

medical TRICARE retiree options. 

3.  I request that a copy of the corrections and any related correspondence be provided to the 
individual concerned, counsel (if any), any Members of Congress who have shown interest, and 

to the Army Review Boards Agency with a copy of this memorandum without enclosures. 

BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Encl 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 

 

     XXXXXXXXX 

 
     Deputy Assistant Secretary 
         (Army Review Boards) 

 

 
CF:  

(  ) DoD PDBR 

(  ) DVA 

 

   5                                                           PD1200374 
 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02765

    Original file (PD-2013-02765.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The requested sleep apnea, anxiety, hypertension and rhinitis conditions were not identified by the PEB, and therefore not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board.Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records. Asthma Condition . The PEB TDRL exit rating was 10%,with the disability description stating: “not...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00224

    Original file (PD2011-00224.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    After 12 months of TDRL the asthma condition was considered to be stable, but still unfitting. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00618

    Original file (PD2011-00618.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI was thus medically separated with a 0% service disability rating. Asthma Condition . In the matter of the asthma condition, the Board unanimously recommends a rating of 60% during the prescribed period of TDRL; and, a permanent service disability rating of 10% coded 6602 IAW VASRD §4.97.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD 2011 01084

    Original file (PD 2011 01084.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    TDRL Rating Chart Final Service IPEB – Dated 20021001 VA – All Effective Date 20030911 Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam On TDRL – 20010813 TDRL Sep. Asthma 6602 30% 0% Asthma 6602 30%* 20031023 .No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. The PEB rated the condition as 6602 asthma, bronchial and assigned a 30% disability stating the asthma condition was only moderately controlled on multiple medications, including daily inhaled anti-inflammatory aerosols. RECOMMENDATION: The Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00469

    Original file (PD2012-00469.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI was re-evaluated almost 14 months later and the PEB recommended removal of the CI from the TDRL with a permanent disability rating of 10%. The PEB initially utilized VASRD code 6602, asthma, and rated it 30% based on daily inhaled medications with normal PFTs and placed the CI on TDRL. I direct that all the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected accordingly no later than 120 days from the date of this memorandum: individual was separated by reason of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01210

    Original file (PD2012 01210.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The PEB adjudicated asthma with VCDand chronic pain left knee conditions as unfitting, rated 30% and 0% respectively,referencing the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. 660230%10%Asthma with Vocal Cord Dysfunction660230%20020606Chronic Pain, Left Knee In addition, the CI had a VCD that significantly responded to the beta-agonist inhalational medication, Albuterol for which the medication profile in evidence reflects dosing...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00234

    Original file (PD2013 00234.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB also identified and forwarded one other condition (shrapnel wound to the right upper arm, which met retention standards) to the PEB.The PEBadjudicated “asthma…” rated at 30%and placed the CI on the Temporary Retired Disability List (TDRL) in order for the condition to be stabilized by treatment.The remaining condition was determined to be not unfitting.The CI made no appeals and was placed on the TDRL in November, 2004, where he continued to receive medical treatment. The Board’s...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00263

    Original file (PD2009-00263.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB’s DA Form 199 dated 20050413 indicated “Asthma, with normal spirometry, on intermittent inhalational bronchodilator therapy.” The PEB specified “Medication profile shows no controller medication between March – April 2004 and 15 February 2005.” The PEB permanent separation rating was 6602 at 10%; and the VASRD 10% criteria contains the phrasing “intermittent inhalational or oral bronchodilator therapy.” There is therefore no evidence that the provisions of DoDI 1332.39 were applied. ...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00941

    Original file (PD2011-00941.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    (2) 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 ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases. The initial narrative summary (NARSUM) and PEB considered the CI unfitting for asthma compounded by vocal cord dysfunction and rated the CI under (analogously to) the asthma coding criteria...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00621

    Original file (PD2012-00621.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Asthma Condition. All treatment notes and the VA exam indicated daily inhaled medication use. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX President Physical Disability Board of Review MINORITY OPINION: The minority voter agrees with the statement in the above proceedings that, “The key question to the Board was whether there was reasonable doubt as to the CI’s severity based on medication use.” The PEB rated the asthma condition...