Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01939
Original file (PD-2013-01939.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX   CASE : PD -20 13 - 01939
BRANCH OF SERVICE: AIR FORCE      BOARD DATE: 201 4 0724
Separation Date: 20050408


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SrA/E-4 (3P051/Security Forces Journeyman) medically separated for asthma. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of her Air Force Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards. She was issued a permanent P4 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The reactive airway disease, presently clinically asymptomatic condition, characterized as “medically unacceptable” and was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “asthma” as unfitting, rated 10% with cited application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : The CI elaborated no specific contention in h er application.


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 asthma 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 20050131
 VA - (4 Mos. Post-Separation) -or- based on Service Treatment Records (STR)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Asthma 6602 10% Asthma 6602 10% 20050820
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x1 (Not in Scope)
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20051027 (most proxi mate to date of separation )


ANALYSIS SUMMARY :
Asthma Condition . The CI was diagnosed with asthma in June 2002 when she had an episode of shortness of breath (SOB) with wheezing while performing gate security. She was taken via ambulance to the base emergency room (ER) and given an A lbuterol nebulizer treatment. The next day she was working at the gate and had a repeat SOB episode that d id not resolve with use of the A lbuterol inhaler. The CI was treat ed at the ER again; she was given another albuterol nebulizer treatment and oral prednisone for 5 days. The CI had a pulmonary function test (PFT) which demonstrated an FEV1-82.2% predicted and a FEV1/FVC 82%. The p ulmonologist diagnosed borderline obstructive airway disease . A methacholine challenge test taken on 23 June 2004 , demonstrated significant bronchial hyper–reactivity which was consistent with the diagnosis of asthma. The MEB narrative summary exam ination ( approximately 5 months prior to separation ), documented that the CI had no further episodes of SOB or wheezing since 14 June 2002. The lung exam ination was normal, with good air movement bi laterally and no wheezes. The A lbuterol inhaler was used only on an as needed basis and the CI was not prescribed any other asthma medication. The examiner diagnosed asymptomatic reactive airway disease. The c ommander’s s tatement noted that the CI was able to perform her duties despite her medical condition. The VA Compensation and Pension exam ination ( approximately 5 months post- separation ), documented that the CI complained of chest tightness, wheezing and SOB which would last for less than 2 hours , approximately 6 times per month and occurred with exertion. T he symptoms would resolve with A lbuterol inhaler use. There were no PFT’s done at this exam.

The Board directs attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . The PEB and the VA chose the same disability code 6602 ( a sthma ) and both rated the condition at 10 %. The CI was prescribed only A lbuterol inhaler to use on an as needed basis and never required any additional asthma medication. The PFT’s were an FEV1 pf 82% and an FEV1/FVC of 82% , and the CI required only intermittent inhalational or oral bronchodilator therapy ; meeting the 10% rating criteria . Considering the totality of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), members agreed that a disability rating of 10% for the asthma condition was appropriately adjudicated by the PEB.


 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 a sthma condition and IAW VASRD §4. 97 , 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 .
invalid font number 31502


The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 131024 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans ’ Affairs Treatment Record







XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review

SAF/MRB

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:

         Reference your application submitted under the provisions of DoDI 6040.44 (Title 10 U.S.C. § 1554a), PDBR Case Number PD-2013-01939

         After careful consideration of your application and treatment records, the Physical Disability Board of Review determined that the rating assigned at the time of final disposition of your disability evaluation system processing was appropriate. Accordingly, the Board recommended no re-characterization or modification of your separation.

         I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board. I concur with that finding and their conclusion that re-characterization of your separation is not warranted. Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that your application be denied.

                                                               Sincerely,






XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Record of Proceedings

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01908

    Original file (PD-2013-01908.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Separation Date: 20040617 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: Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01954

    Original file (PD-2013-01954.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    SEPARATION DATE: 20050331 The Board found the CI met the higher 30% evaluation due to “ inhalational anti-inflammatory medication” (Advair)use at the time of separation as specified under code 6602.After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a disability rating of 30% for the asthma condition. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554(a), I approve the enclosed recommendation of the...

  • 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 | CY2014 | PD-2014-00712

    Original file (PD-2014-00712.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. RATING COMPARISON : ServiceIPEB – Dated 20071023VA Based on Service Treatment Records(STR)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Asthma…660210%Asthma660210%STROther x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 0 RATING: 10%RATING: 10%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00859

    Original file (PD 2012 00859.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB forwarded the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reactive disease as medically unacceptable IAW AR 40-501, and no other conditions for PEB adjudication. The other requested conditions, “lumbrosacral” strain, chondromalacia patella right, hearing loss, and tinnitus are not within the Board’s purview. 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 | CY2013 | PD-2013-02521

    Original file (PD-2013-02521.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. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01354

    Original file (PD-2013-01354.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    A review by the US Army Physical Disability Agencyreaffirmed the IPEB’s findings and the CI was medically separated. The Board reviews medical records and other available evidence to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, using the VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation. 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01552

    Original file (PD-2013-01552.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The service treatment record (STR) initially reflected that the CI wasbeing worked-up for a respiratory condition noting the first of many spirometry/pulmonary function tests (PFTs) dated 28 August 2002. The CI was never placed on oral corticosteroids; therefore, Board members deliberated if the CI’s condition supported the 30% criteria level.Clearly, the final pulmonology report noted no use of medication for the previous “several months.”Additionally, the post-separation VA examination...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01508

    Original file (PD-2014-01508.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Separation Date: 20081230 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. The examiner documented that the CI was actively taking all prescribed medications.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01241

    Original file (PD 2012 01241.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE NUMBER: PD1201241 BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY BOARD DATE: 20130425 SEPARATION DATE: 20020430 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SSG/E-6 (71L30/Administrative NCOIC), medically separated for exertional shortness of breath (SOB) secondary to reactive airway disease (RAD). The examiner opined the CI had exertional...