Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01339
Original file (PD2013 01339.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD 13-01339      
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army          BOARD DATE: 20140129
SEPARATION DATE: 20040701                


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (63M / Bradley Fighting Vehicle System Mechanic) medically separated for an allergic contact dermatitis, hand eczema condition. The CI became symptomatic to nickel and rubber in 2002. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). He was issued a permanent P3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The hand eczema condition, characterized as two separate conditions “hand eczema and allergic contact dermatitis”, was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The informal PEB adjudicated “allergic contact dermatitis, hand eczema” as unfitting, rated 0%, citing AR 40-501, Section 3-28. The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “The condition is so severe it prevents me from walking straight. The discs in my backbone became very bad causing lots of pain and depression. I can’t stand for long periods of time without numbness and shooting pain down my left leg. The VA will not do surgery because the type of surgery I need the VA does not offer because it new in the medical field. I have been taking several different medications that caused my dependence and now I am in a VA program that helps deal with pain and depression and dependence prevention. I am unable to pick up heavy objects, drive for long periods. I have spent a lot of money and time trying different doctors for physical therapy, acupuncture, tens unit, with no relief of pain. It is only gotten worse over time. I’m severely in pain and depressed 24/7 loss of sleep and not having a ???. I have also had my left knee start going out on me I believe it started in the military. I remember going to sick call for it but I do not have those records on hand.


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 Service rating for the unfitting hand eczema/contact dermatitis 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 Army Board of Correction of Military Records (BCMR.)


RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20040512
 VA - (1 Mos. Pre-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Allergic … Eczema 7806 0% Allergic Contact Dermatitis 7899-7806 0% 20040603
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 3 20040603
Combined: 0%
 Combined: 20%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 20040726 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).

ANALYSIS SUMMARY: 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 Military Disability Evaluation System (DES) has neither the role nor the authority to compensate service 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 Veteran Affairs (VA), operating under a different set of laws.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis. The first record in evidence dated 1 November 2001 and four months after accession noted that the CI had a type of eczema and was treated with steroids. He used topical steroids as needed, but continued to have problems and was subsequently also diagnosed with contact dermatitis. He tested positive for an allergy to nickel (the metal) in November 2002. He was managed with duty limitations and topical steroids. He was subsequently found to be sensitive to mercaptobenzothiazole, a rubber additive found in gas masks among other products. It was determined that these sensitivities were not compatible with deployment or his MOS and MEB was initiated. The narrative summary noted that the CI had adequate control of the condition as his exposure to these two materials was restricted and that he had no problems working at a desk job. No skin abnormalities were documented on examination. At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination performed one month before separation, the CI reported he had not had contact dermatitis or used topical steroids for over one year. On examination, his skin was unremarkable. The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB and VA coded the condition 7806 (dermatitis) and 7899-7806 (analogous to dermatitis), respectively, but both rated the condition at 0%. The Board noted that for a dermatitis condition which involves less than 5% of the body and which had not required treatment for 12 months, this is the appropriate rating.


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 skin condition and IAW VASRD §4.118, 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
Allergic Contact Dermatitis, Hand Eczema, Controlled 7806 0%
COMBINED 0%


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20130909, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record



                          
         XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF
         President
         Physical Disability Board of Review



SFMR-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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20140005202 (PD201301339)


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
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01795

    Original file (PD-2013-01795.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI reported flares of the skin with sun exposure only. The diagnosis was atopic (allergic rhinitis) and the examiner opined that increased temperature (rather than sunlight or ultraviolet radiation caused the rash.At a VA dermatology evaluation on 30 September 2004,a month after separation, the CI was using vitamin E lotion only, having “tried and failed”multiple treatments including oral steroids, steroid creams, antihistamines, animmunosuppressant skin cream (Elidel), and “light box...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00158

    Original file (PD2012-00158.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the chronic hand and foot dermatitis condition as unfitting, rated 10% with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The chronic hand and foot dermatitis condition requested for consideration meets the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview, and is addressed below. The older ratings were based on a judgment about the degree of exfoliation, exudation or itching; or the presence of disfigurement, systemic or nervous...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01602

    Original file (PD-2013-01602.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DATE OF PLACEMENT ON TDRL: 20030706Date of Permanent SEPARATION: 20040720 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 asthma condition and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00101

    Original file (PD2012-00101.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the contact dermatitis condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The knee pain and anxiety conditions as requested for consideration meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview and are addressed below, in addition to a review of the ratings for the unfitting condition of contact dermatitis. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00063

    Original file (PD2009-00063.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Dermatitis/Latex Condition . Other Conditions . There were several other medical conditions documented in the service and VA records.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03167

    Original file (PD-2014-03167.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The C&P exam noted the CI was treated for contact dermatitis for less than 6 weeks within the past 12 months with a topical corticosteroid cream. BOARD FINDINGS : 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 contact dermatitis to hydraulic fluids condition and IAW VASRD §4.118 (Schedule of Ratings –Skin), the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.There were no other...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00464

    Original file (PD2012-00464.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating Combined: 10% that indicated determinations, compared to VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation; and, to review those fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) based on MOS performance limitations in evidence at separation. The MEB physical exam performed approximately 8 months prior to separation, noted scalp...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01344

    Original file (PD-2013-01344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20040722 Both the PEB and VA rated the DLE condition at 10% analogously coded 7809-7806. Covered skin was not susceptible to rash.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00997

    Original file (PD2010-00997.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Regardless of the criteria used, the IPEB rating is consistent with the VA rating at 10% nearly two years after separation, and code 7820 does allow rating under code 7806, used by the VA and supporting a 10% rating. After careful consideration of all available evidence the Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02255

    Original file (PD-2014-02255.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 CI ultimately responded to a 10-day, followed by a 21-day, taper of decreasing doses of oral steroids.A subsequent dermatology consultation from March 2008 (8 months prior to separation) described the previous...