Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01881
Original file (PD-2013-01881.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX           CASE: PD-2013-01881
BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY           BOARD DATE: 20140717
SEPARATION DATE: 20051030


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty PV2/E-2 (11B/Infantry) medically separated for hearing loss. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty. He was issued a permanent H3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The MEB found the hearing loss condition medically unacceptable and forwarded it to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The PEB found the hearing loss condition unfitting and rated it at 0%. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI’s CONTENTION: “Many Vets that I spoke with said I should be getting 20% or more for my tinnitus and hearing loss in both ears. I was given a 10% rating for tinnitus, 0% rating for Bilateral hearing impairment.”


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 hearing loss is addressed below. No other conditions are within the Board’s defined purview. Any conditions outside the Board’s scope of review may be eligible for consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Army PEB – dated 20051005
 VA – (Exam ~ 2 mos. Pre-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Sensorineural Hearing Loss 6100 0% Bilateral Hearing Impairment 6100 0% 20050812
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries in Scope
 Other x 1 20050812
Combined: 0%
 Combined: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 51110 (most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] )


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board acknowledges the CI’s contention that tinnitus was not included in the Disability Evaluation System (DES) process. It is noted for the record that the Board is subject to the same laws for disability entitlements as those under which the DES operates. The Board’s authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness and rating determinations at the time of separation. While tinnitus may have been present, compensation can only be offered for those conditions that cut short a member’s career and then only to the degree of severity present at the time of separation. The VA, however, is empowered to compensate for all service-connected conditions and to periodically re-evaluate conditions for the purpose of adjusting the Veteran’s disability rating should the degree of impairment change over time.

Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). In 2004, this CI entered the Army with normal hearing. Four months later, in March 2005, an incident occurred on the firing range. With earplugs not properly in place, he fired 180 rounds with an M-4. After that, he had hearing loss and tinnitus (ringing in the ears). The CI was seen by audiology and numerous tests were done. The testing confirmed that he had bilateral high frequency SNHL, left ear worse than right ear. On 1 June 2005, the CI had a SPRINT (speech recognition in noise test). Based on the results of the SPRINT test, an MEB was initiated. The CI had an audiogram on 12 August 2005 and a follow-up audiogram (noise free) on 23 August 2005. The results of those hearing tests are shown in the charts below.
Audiometric Threshold (Hz) → 500 1000 2000 3000 4000 MD CNC Comments
Audiogram done 11 weeks Pre-Sep (20050812)
Right 15 10 20 70 75 92%
Left 20 20 80 70 75 92%
Audiogram done 10 weeks Pre-Sep (20050823)
Right 10 5 25 75 60 14 hours Noise Free
Left 15 5 75 75 75
invalid font number 31502
Hearing
 11 weeks Pre-Sep
(20050812)
 10 weeks Pre-Sep
(20050823)
Right Ear
 Average 43.75 dB 41.25 dB
Speech Discrimination 92%
Table VI/VIa (I) from Table VI (I) from Table VI
Left Ear
 Average 61.25 dB 57.5 dB
Speech Discrimination 92%
Table VI/VIa (IV)=(V) from Table VIa (IV)=(V) from Table VIa
§4.85 Rating
Table VII 0% 0%
§4.86 Rating
Table VII 0% 0%
invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 (Average is the sum of pure tone thresholds at 1000, 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz; divided by four)

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. As noted above, the CI was found unfit for duty, due to high frequency SNHL and was medically separated with a 0% disability rating. The 23 August 2005 exam was performed just 10 weeks prior to separation and therefore had significant probative value. IAW VASRD §4.85 (Table VI), and based on the 23 August 2005 exam, the right ear was Class I and the left ear was Class I or Class II. However, the Board determined that VASRD §4.86 (exceptional patterns of hearing impairment) was applicable in this case. For the reader’s convenience, the VASRD §4.86(b) language for diagnostic code 6100 is excerpted below:

(b) “When the puretone threshold is 30 decibels or less at 1000 Hertz, and
70 decibels or more at 2000 Hertz, the rating specialist will determine the
Roman numeral designation for hearing impairment from either Table VI or
Table VIa, whichever results in the higher numeral. That numeral will then
be elevated to the next higher Roman numeral. Each ear will be evaluated
separately.” (Authority: 38 U.S.C. 1155)

Therefore, IAW VASRD §4.86(b), the left ear is elevated from Class IV to Class V. This is due to his “exceptional pattern of hearing impairment” and because hearing is key to interpersonal communication. However, even though the left ear is elevated to Class V, the SNHL condition still did not reach a compensable level. The Board determined that a disability rating of 0% is warranted for the SNHL condition, it is appropriately coded 6100, and IAW VASRD §4.85 and §4.86 meets criteria for the 0% rating level. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt) and §4.7 (higher of two evaluations), the Board found insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication of the hearing loss condition.

Other Contended Conditions. As noted above, tinnitus was not a specific MEB/PEB condition, and is not within the Board’s scope of review.


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 SNHL condition and IAW VASRD §4.85 and §4.86, 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 20131023, 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, AR20150002631 (PD201301881)


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 | CY2013 | PD-2013-02124

    Original file (PD-2013-02124.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Bilateral Sensori-Neural Hearing Loss . The PEB and VA both rated the hearing loss at 0% using the code 6100, hearing loss. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00450

    Original file (PD2010-00450.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION : The CI’s contention, provided by the Disabled American Veterans National Service Office, asserts that the CI’s back pain condition is unfitting and should be appropriately rated 20% by VASRD standards; that the CI’s hearing loss is unfitting but not compensable by VASRD standards; that the CI’s back condition should be awarded an additional 10% rating for compression fracture with 60% loss of vertebral height; and that tinnitus should be added as an additional unfitting...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00833

    Original file (PD2012-00833.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW BRANCH OF SERVICE: MARINE CORPS SEPARATION DATE: 20021130 NAME: XX CASE NUMBER: PD1200833 BOARD DATE: 20130117 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (0311/Rifleman), medically separated for profound bilateral hearing loss in the high frequency ranges. The PEB adjudicated the bilateral sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) condition as...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00481

    Original file (PD-2014-00481.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 then considered whether there was sufficient evidence to support a 10% rating for functional loss (§4.40, §4.45).The MEB examination in January 2006 recorded a history of left knee pain “sometimes,” and the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00616

    Original file (PD2011-00616.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was then medically separated with a 10% disability rating. Sensorineural Hearing Loss with Tinnitus Condition . In the matter of the bilateral sensorineural hearing Loss with tinnitus condition and IAW VASRD §4.85 and §4.86, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication at separation.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00556

    Original file (PD2011-00556.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Six other conditions, as identified in the rating chart below, were forwarded on the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) submission as medically acceptable conditions. The PEB adjudicated the bilateral SNHL as unfitting, rated 0% with application of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The service ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02114

    Original file (PD-2014-02114.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 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. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150010552 (PD201402114)I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01522

    Original file (PD-2013-01522.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Sensorineural Hearing Loss 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01200

    Original file (PD-2014-01200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Hearing Loss61000%Bilateral Hearing Loss61000%20040705Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 1 RATING: 0%RATING: 0% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20100522(most proximate to date of separation (DOS). Both the PEB and VA coded the hearing loss condition under 6100 with ratings of 0% citing no compensable hearing loss. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01513

    Original file (PD-2014-01513.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 theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Hearing Loss61000%Bilateral Hearing Loss61000%20080812Other x 0 (In Scope)Other x 6 Rating: 0%Combined: 30%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated...