Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01487
Original file (PD-2013-01487.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD-2013-01487
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141003
SEPARATION DATE: 20040227


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (56M/Chaplain Assistant) medically separated for diabetes mellitus (DM) Type II condition. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent P3 profile, could perform alternate aerobic conditioning exercises and subsequently referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The diabetes condition, characterized as “type II diabetes mellitus,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The PEB adjudicated “diabetes mellitus, type II, poor control, requiring insulin and restricted diet” as unfitting, rated 20%, referencing the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “After being discharged it was discussed that I am a Type I diabetic and not a type II Diabetic. I have included a copy of my progress notes from my care provider with the statement that I am a Type I…” (sic)


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 Type II DM condition is addressed below; 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 20031210 VA - (5 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Diabetes Mellitus, Type II 7913 20% Diabetes Mellitus Type II 7913 20% 20040722
Other x 0 (Not in Scope) Other 7 (Not in Scope) 20040722
Combined: 20% Combined: 30%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 20 0 40916 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board utilizes VA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations; and, DoDI 6040.44 defines a 12-month interval for special consideration to post-separation evidence. The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of the Disability Evaluation System fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. Post-separation evidence therefore is probative only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the disability and fitness implications at the time of separation.

Diabetes Mellitus Condition. The service treatment record contained a scant amount of source documents regarding this condition and most historical information was obtained from MEB related summary reports. During the 13-month period from the initial diagnosis to the CI’s separation, the DM condition was initially managed with a varied dose of an oral hypoglycemic agent, as well as dietary education and restrictions of activities with poor results. Daily insulin was added to his medication regime. The records did not reveal any history of significant complications of DM nor of any hospitalizations for the same. The CI was issued a permanent profile that restricted his duty assignments so as to assure access to medications and appropriate medical care. Notably, the profile provided for no activity restriction whatsoever. The commander’s statement reiterated the CI’s restriction from world-wide deployment, but emphasized the CI’s ability to perform many other aspects of his MOS duties, to include the Army’s fitness test. Neither the MEB (24 October 2003…4 months prior to separation) nor VA (22 July 2004…3 months after separation) examiner noted findings on the physical examination that pertain to the VASRD rating of the diabetes condition. The clinical evidence at the time of separation was consistent with a 20% rating IAW VASRD §4.120 as determined by the PEB. There was no laboratory evidence that ketoacidosis or hypoglycemia were manifested at any time since the original diagnosis. Neither the physical profile nor commander’s statement, as presented above, provided evidence that any regulation of routine activities was imposed by the DM condition. Upon deliberation Board members agreed that the 40% rating criteria under 7913 were not reasonably supported by the evidence at hand and there is not reasonable doubt in the CI’s favor, therefore, to justify a Board recommendation for other than the 20% rating assigned by the PEB for the diabetes 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 DM condition and IAW VASRD §4.120, 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 re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.


The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20130916, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record








                 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review

SAMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(AHRC-DO), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557


 SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150002990 (PD201301487)

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                                                  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                                      Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                                                      (Review Boards)
                                                     
CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02787

    Original file (PD-2014-02787.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20030912 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. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02130

    Original file (PD-2014-02130.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was issued a P4 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The CI non-concurred but later concurred with the PEB findings and recommendations and was medically separated. Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Diabetes Mellitus Type I 791320%Diabetes Mellitus791320%20031212Diabetic Retinopathy w/ Lattice Degeneration600710%20031221Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy, LLE8599-852010%20031212Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy, RLE8599-852010%20031212Other x 0...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02180

    Original file (PD-2014-02180.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The PEB and VA both used code 7913 (DM) and rated it at 20%. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00642

    Original file (PD2012-00642.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW SEPARATION DATE: 20020731 NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY CASE NUMBER: PD1200642 BOARD DATE: 20121025 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4, (31U, Communications Specialist) medically separated for Type II diabetes mellitus (DM). Pre-Separation) – Effective Date 20020801 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam Condition Diabetes...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00309

    Original file (PD2011-00309.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The examiner did not, however, describe activity restrictions, and specifically stated, “His current fitness regimen consists of full participation in unit PT, doing calisthenics and running two miles three-times/week.” In addition, the commander’s statement related the CI was “a highly motivated top performer who has shown no ill effects from his medical condition and treatment,” and further stated “he is fully capable of performing all of his assigned duties, deploy and participate in...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01127

    Original file (PD2013 01127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The condition, characterized as “diabetes type I requiring insulin” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The Informal PEB adjudicated “diabetes mellitus type I”as unfitting, rated 20%.The remaining condition was determined to be not unfitting and not rated.The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows:

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01036

    Original file (PD 2012 01036.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The VA Rating Decision (VARD) of June 2005 indicated a civilian medical report indicating fluctuating blood sugars, increased insulin requirements and required regulation of activities due to diabetes. The VA increased their rating to 40% effective May 2005 (30 months after separation) based on that evidence. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: UNFITTING CONDITION VASRD...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00434

    Original file (PD-2014-00434.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The diabetes and stress fracture conditions, characterized as “diabetes mellitus type I” and “right tibial stress fracture,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. 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 Board directed its...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00974

    Original file (PD 2012 00974.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board evaluates DVA evidence in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness and rating determinations at the time of separation. 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 Diabetes Mellitus 7913 20% COMBINED 20% The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 294,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00446

    Original file (PD2012-00446.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the DM, Type 2 condition as unfitting, rated 20%, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board’s role is confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to VASRD standards, based on severity at the time of separation. RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation...