Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01236
Original file (PD2013 01236.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX         CASE: PD1301236
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20140415
SEPARATION DATE: 20040828


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an activated National Guard SPC/E-4 (63B10/Light Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) medically separated for recurrent transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) associated with left-sided weakness. The TIA condition could not be adequately rehabilitated 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 stroke-like conditions, characterized as “right subcortical TIA manifested by left LE weakness” and “left UE numbness, dysarthria, and diaphoresis, all of which lasting 30 minutes,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The informal PEB adjudicated “recurrent TIAs, involving right subcortical white matter manifested by left arm or left leg weakness, occurring once per month, lasting approximately 30 minutes” as unfitting, rated 10%. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “Disability became more severe, cannot walk a long time, pain in right inner leg, was denied, need reevaluate. PTSD was denied, reevaluated. Became a diabetic in Army, when I was deployed. 2004 See V.A. medical record.”


SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his service-connected condition continues to burden him; but, must emphasize that the Disability Evaluation System 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, operating under a different set of laws. 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 TIA condition is addressed below; the requested posttraumatic stress disorder and diabetes conditions were not identified by the PEB and thus are 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, may be eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.


RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20040721
 VA - (2 Days Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Transient Ischemic Attacks 8099-8008 10% Hemiparesis of Left Lower Extremity, Residual of Stroke 8099-8520 20% 20040830
Hemiparesis of Left Upper Extremity, Residual of Stroke 8099-8212 10% 20040830
Hyperhidrosis, Residual of Stroke 8099-7832 0% 20040830
Memory Loss, Residual of Stroke 9399-9326 0% 20040830
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 8 20040830
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 40%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 20050207 (within 6 months of separation); VARD 200 41005 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ) reflects entitlement to vocational rehabilitation .


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Transient Ischemic Attacks (TIA) Associated with Left-Sided Weakness. The CI’s initial medical work-up for an acute onset of left sided weakness and numbness lasting 30 minutes began in January 2004; however, records indicate a prior episode of similar symptoms occurred in April 2003 that lasted for an hour. There were no clinical documents in evidence of the reported April event. An initial cardiac evaluation that included trans-esophageal echocardiography failed to identify a cardiac source of embolic events (clots that travel to the brain) that could cause a stroke or stroke-like symptoms. Neuro-diagnostic studies revealed no clinically relevant abnormality. Carotid ultrasound was normal. Extensive evaluation revealed no clear cause of the CI’s condition, although a brain bleed, clot, or mass was ruled out. The MEB narrative summary (NARSUM) examination in April 2004 performed 4 months prior to separation, summarized the CI’s past history of symptoms and treatment; noting, no further episodic symptoms since original onset in January 2004. The physical and mental status examination were normal except for a bilateral UE slight “intention tremor” (shakiness of hands/arms when initiating and action of some sort). Cranial nerves 2-12 were intact. There were no neurological deficits; gait was normal. The diagnosis was right subcortical (brain) TIA manifested by left lower extremity weakness. There was no comment in regards to the CI’s functional ability. Three months later (July 2004), a NARSUM addendum noted that the CI endorsed “…continued occasional subtle left UE or left LE weakness, occurring once per month, each episode lasting approximately 30 minutes.” A statement letter from the CI dated 17 June 2004 indicated that since April 2004, his symptoms were weakness, numbness and tingling in his left arm and left leg occurring 2-3 times per week. His examination remained unchanged, but his diagnosis was changed to recurrent TIAs involving [an area of the brain] secondary to hypertension (elevated blood pressure) and hyperlipidemia (elevated cholesterol/fats). The examiner specifically noted, “…this [CI] is continuing to have TIAs.” Again, there was no comment on his functional ability; however, the permanent profile of 9 April 2004 limited only assignment or deployments to areas with definitive medical care, but that his activities were otherwise unrestricted. At a follow-up neurology note of 16 June 2004, the CI endorsed occasional subtle numbness of both the left upper and lower extremities for 30 minutes once a month. The examination was normal and the diagnosis was “recurrent TIAs.” At the VA (neurology) Compensation and Pension examination in September 2004 performed 3 weeks after separation, the CI reported symptoms as described above (from his statement) with the addition of worsening memory loss. The physical and mental examination was grossly normal with the examiner stating, “…but I cannot exclude that he indeed is different from baseline.” His gait was normal. The diagnosis remained as TIAs. There was no comment in regards to social or occupational impairment.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB’s determination of a single encompassing diagnosis of TIAs left room for elucidation of the unfitting condition in regards to any associated residuals. Conversely, the VA rated according to residuals of the general TIA condition. The DA Form 199 listed residuals associated with the TIA condition but its rationale found the CI unfit primarily due to the recurrence of his symptoms at once a month for 30 minutes. This explanation is supported by the evidence described above, which revealed infrequent symptom exacerbations with virtually no resulting functional impairment. In light of normal sensory, motor, and strength findings on examination, it was apparent that the occasional residual left-sided extremity weakness was not severe enough to be found independently unfitting; and, the level of impairment could best be described as “mild.” 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’s 10% adjudication for the TIA 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 TIA condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, 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.


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20130911, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record








                                   
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , AR20140019506 (PD201301236)

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01078

    Original file (PD2013 01078.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated “left hand numbness…,” rated 10%,citing criteria of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The narrative summary was dated 24 January 2006, 3 months prior to separation, and noted that the CI had persistent left elbow pain and numbness in the left 5th and 4th fingers. These included full range-of-motion of the left shoulder and elbow with normal grip...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00377

    Original file (PD2010-00377.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence, the Board recommends a service disability rating of 20% for the cervical (neck) condition. The Board determined therefore that none of the stated conditions were subject to service disability rating. The PEB disability description specified that there was ROM limited by pain and that the PEB used the PT exam (which was closer to the date of separation) as their rating exam.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01233

    Original file (PD2012 01233.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB forwarded no other conditions for Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication.The PEB adjudicated the right hemiparesis secondary to open-lip schizencephaly as unfitting, rated 20%,with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). They did not allow me to stay in.I didn't think I had a fair medical review board. 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 | CY2012 | PD2012-00535

    Original file (PD2012-00535.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    (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. Pre-Separation) – All Effective Date 20030301 Condition Rating Code Exam Code 8516 suboccipital duraplasty Chiari Service FPEB – Dated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00863

    Original file (PD2010-00863.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    I then went before the formal board and received 10% with a disability code of 7121 which allows up to 30% disability rating which would have allowed me to retire.” In block 14 of the DD Form 294 he notes: “The following is the VA decision on disability: I was rated at 60% disabled with the following determinations: Right Kidney Cortical Atrophy with Compensatory Left Kidney Hypertrophy with Residual Thinning & Scarring, Aortic Valve Insufficiency with Regurgitation, Mitral Valve...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00654

    Original file (PD-2014-00654.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    At TDRL placement, the PEB adjudicated the CI’s headache condition at 10% coded 8045-9304 (brain disease due to trauma, purely subjective).The PEB documented that the CI’s headaches required him to go home from work twice a week, but that he was still able to work 30 hours a week.The VA rated the condition of chronic headaches, coded 8100 (migraine). The FPEB, under code 6081, rated the condition at 10%, and noted the condition was stable but prevented the return to active duty.The Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00232

    Original file (PD2012-00232.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW SEPARATION DATE: 20050511 NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY CASE NUMBER: PD1200232 BOARD DATE: 20121022 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (88M/Truck Driver), medically separated for chronic left upper extremity pain and weakness secondary to shrapnel injury. Service member was not evaluated for PTSD and TBI during his...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00066

    Original file (PD2010-00066.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was medically separated with a 10% disability rating. In the matter of the right arm and leg weakness conditions, migraine headache condition, vascular dementia and mood disorder condition, the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend a finding of unfit for additional rating at separation. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01697

    Original file (PD-2014-01697.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEBadjudicated “cognitive disorder and APLSas a single unfitting condition, rated 10% with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining condition (left hemisphere stroke) was determined to be not unfitting. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Cognitive Disorder…9399-930510%Residuals, Stroke Due to APLS with Mild Cognitive Changes7099-800910%20120927Left Hemisphere Stroke Secondary to APLSNot UnfittingOther x 0...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02121

    Original file (PD-2014-02121.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A neurology evaluation performed on 1March 2005 as part of his pain evaluation. The chest wall pain was diagnosed as costo-chondritis and the left upper arm pain was secondary to both a blood clot and a neuropathy of the ulnar nerve. 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...