Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01507
Original file (PD2012 01507.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:    CASE: PD1201507
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20130417
SEPARATION DATE: 20020505


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty PFC/E-3 (11B/Infantry) medically separated for recurrent heat exhaustion. The CI experienced heat exhaustion for the first time during a training exercise at the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, California in June of 2001. He was treated and returned to duty. Subsequently, he experienced two additional episodes. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of this Military Occupational Specialty. He was given a permanent P4 profile and was referred to the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The recurrent heat exhaustion was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The PEB adjudicated the recurrent heat exhaustion condition as unfitting, rated 0%. The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated with that rating.


CI CONTENTION: “ I have none of the other symptoms of ‘hyperthroidism’ & cannot receive a true judgment on my rating until my diagnosis that led to discharge is changed.”


SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e. (2). It is limited to those conditions determined by the PEB to be unfitting for continued military service and those conditions identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB when specifically requested by the CI. The rating for the unfitting recurrent heat exhaustion condition is addressed below, and, no additional conditions are 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.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20020213
 VA - (2 Mos. Pre-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Recurrent Heat Exhaustion 7999-7900 0% Recurrent Heat Exhaustion 7999-7900 0% 20020319
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 2 20020319
Combined: 0%
 Combined: 0%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 20502 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Recurrent Heat Exhaustion Condition. Service treatment records (STRs) indicated initial heat related injury occurred while training as infantryman in June 2001. Five days after the initial injury, the CI suffered another episode of heat exhaustion. In September 2001, the CI was able to perform a 12 mile ruck march when placed in cooler climate but was unsuccessful in meeting other requirements of completing his training. The day following the ruck march, he presented to the emergency room where it was determined he had suffered a third heat related illness or rhabdomyolysis. The CI was placed on quarters for several days until laboratory work ups were normal. Chest X-rays, 24 October 2001, revealed normal heart and lungs. The CI was placed on permanent profile, 17 December 2001, which limited airborne operations. The commander statement indicated the CI could not perform his duties as a soldier due to physical limitations produced by multiple heat injuries. At the MEB narrative summary evaluation, on 12 December 2001, 5 months prior to separation, the CI was asymptomatic, and no additional heat injuries were recorded. Physical examination recorded a blood pressure of 118/78, resting heart rate (pulse) of 88 and an unremarkable physical exam. There was no history of loss of consciousness or seizure activity. There is no entry in the STR recording a pulse rate of 100 or higher. The physician opined, “his prognosis is good. It is most likely that after he gets off active duty, he will always be at slight risk to be a heat casualty again but this should not affect his ability to become a fully productive member of society.” At the Compensation and Pension examination, 19 March 2002, less than 2 months prior to separation, physical examination was unremarkable; his pulse was noted at 64 beats per minute, and normal blood pressure recorded.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB and the VA found the heat illness condition unfitting, coded analogously to hyperthyroidism (7900), and rated the condition at 0% based on recurrent heat injuries. The analogous code is in common use for heat illness. The code requires at least intermittent tachycardia and tremor or the need for continuous medication to achieve the minimum compensable rating (10%). None of these requirements were met. After 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 for the heat injury condition. There is no evidence that would justify a different coding/rating recommendation.


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 recurrent heat exhaustion condition and IAW VASRD §4.119, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. 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
Recurrent Heat Exhaustion 7999-7900 0%
COMBINED
 0%



The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20120807, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record




         Physical Disability Board of Review


 SFMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(TAPD-ZB),

SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for AR20130010217 (PD201201507)

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                                                 
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01953

    Original file (PD-2013-01953.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBadjudicated “recurrent heat exhaustion” as unfitting, rated 0%, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01981

    Original file (PD-2014-01981.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The PE was normal including vital signs and blood pressure parameters. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01968

    Original file (PD-2013-01968.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Heat Exhaustion, Recurrent7999-79000%Heat Stroke8099-8019NSC20051107Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 620051107 Rating: 0%Combined: 10%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20060418 ( most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). Other Contended Condition .The CI’s application asserts that a compensable rating should be considered for the asthma condition. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00107

    Original file (PD2012-00107.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the heat stroke condition as unfitting, rated 0% with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Heat Stroke Condition . Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01725

    Original file (PD-2012-01725.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Heatstroke 7999-7900 10% Heat Exhaustion 8999-8911 NSC 20020729 No Additional MEB/PEB Entries Nephrolithiasis 7508 0 20020729 Combined: 10% Combined: 0% Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20020807 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). Heatstroke Condition. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03407

    Original file (PD-2014-03407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The InformalPEBadjudicated “recurrent episodes of heat exhaustion/heat intolerance” including atypical chest pain in its disability descriptionas unfitting, rated 10%,with application of theVA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. 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 recurrent episodes of heat exhaustion and heat intolerance...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00948

    Original file (PD2012-00948.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the history of heat stroke condition as unfitting, rated 10% with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). In the matter of the heat condition and IAW VASRD §4.12a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record SFMR-RB MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency (TAPD-ZB / ), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00523

    Original file (PD2012-00523.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    All evidence to two Heat Strokes is in Military Medical Records. Even though I suffered two (2) Heat Strokes and was told I was being discharged for it, I do not receive any rating what so ever for it. Recurrent Heat Stroke with Rhabdomyolysis Condition .

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00035

    Original file (PD2010-00035.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ER evaluation revealed heat injury, acute renal failure secondary to rhabdomyolysis and he was admitted to the hospital. In the matter of the migraine headaches, left knee pain or any other medical conditions eligible for Board consideration; the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend any findings of unfit for additional rating at separation. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02026

    Original file (PD-2014-02026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At the VA Compensation and Pension examination(performed 11 months after separation), the CI reported during the acute heat injury he was hydrated and he had some heat intolerance; otherwise, he has no functional impairment, no residuals from heat exhaustion since 2004. The PEB adjudicated the recurrent heat intolerance and injury condition by applying the analogous VASRD code of 7999-7900 (hyperthyroidism)and rating it 0%. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no...