Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02026
Original file (PD-2014-02026.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD-2014-02026
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20140925
SEPARATION DATE: 20060922


SUMMARY OF CASE: The available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty S PC /E- 4 ( 92M / Mortuary Affairs Specialist) medically separated for multiple reoccurring episodes of heat exhaustion . The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The MEB forwarded heat exhaustion condition, characterized as “ heat exha ustion, unspecified , ” to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded three other conditions ( c hronic low back pain [LBP] , b ilateral shoulder pain and d ysthymic d isorder) for PEB adjudication. The Informal PEB adjudicated the heat exhaustion condition as unfitting, rated at 0%. The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting . The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : “ Please c onsider all conditions. ”


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 heat exhaustion condition and not unfitting and contended chronic low back pain, bilateral shoulder pain and dysthymic disorder conditions are addressed below. Any condition 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 20060623
 VA* - (~11 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Recurrent Heat Exhaustion 7999-7900 0% Heat Exhaustion 8999-8911 NSC 20070829
Chronic Low Back Pain Not Unfitting Osteoarthritis of the Lumbar Spine … 5243 10% 20070829
Bilateral Shoulder Pain Not Unfitting Residuals of AC Joint Separation Surgery, Right Shoulder 5201-5024 10% 20070829
Residuals of AC Joint Separation Surgery, Left Shoulder 5201-5024 10% 20070829
Dysthymic Disorder Not Unfitting Post - Traumatic Stress Disorder 9411 30% 20070910
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 2 (Not in Scope) 20070829
Rated: 0%
 Combined: 50%
* Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 80307 (most proximate to the date of separation )


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board acknowledges the CI’s contention for ratings of his chronic LBP, bilateral shoulder pain and dysthymic disorder noted above which were determined to be not unfitting by the PEB; and, emphasizes that disability compensation may only be offered for those conditions that cut short the member’s career. Should the Board judge that any contested conditions were most likely incompatible with specific duty requirements; a disability rating IAW the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and based on the degree of disability evidenced at separation, will be recommended.

Heat Exhaustion Condition: The evidence documented that the CI had at least four episodes of heat injury/exhaustion within a 5-year period prior to his separation. There are no service treatment records (STR) present for review that was generated during his acute episodes. The narrative summary prepared (approximately 6 months prior to separation), noted his first episode occurred in the summer of 2003. He stated he lost consciousness due to the heat and was revived at the battalion aid station with conventional cooling techniques followed by light duty profiling. He subsequently had three-to-four more episodes of heat exhaustion, all treated with outpatient cooling techniques and profiling. The physical examination was normal. All laboratory tests including thyroid function tests were essentially normal. The examiner diagnosed heat exhaustion and made to following statement concerning functional status:

“Service member states that he can perform his MOS both in garrison and in the field. He is able to carry and fire a weapon. He is able to wear a Kevlar helmet, ride in tactical vehicles and work in cold environments. He is not able to wear MOPP gear, load-bearing equipment, Kevlar vest or 40-pound rucksack. He is not able to work in hot environments.”

At the VA Compensation and Pension examination (performed 11 months after separation), the CI reported during the acute heat injury he was hydrated and he had some heat intolerance; otherwise, he has no functional impairment, no residuals from heat exhaustion since 2004. The examiner made the following concluding statement concerning the heat injury:

“DIAGNOSIS: Heat exhaustion/dehydration, resolved. Subjective Factors: The patient states he is intolerant to hot weather. Objective Factors: Physical exam is unremarkable. The patient did not have the stroke. Had dehydration and that resolved with the IV fluids.”

The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB adjudicated the recurrent heat intolerance and injury condition by applying the analogous VASRD code of 7999-7900 (hyperthyroidism) and rating it 0%. The VA applied the analogous code of 8999-8911 (petit mal epilepsy) and did not grant service-connection for heat exhaustion. There is no specific VASRD code for heat intolerance or injury so IAW VASRD rating principle §4.20 analogous ratings were applied. This principle states, “When an unlisted condition is encountered it will be permissible to rate under a closely related disease or injury in which not only the functions affected, but the anatomical localization and symptomatology are closely analogous.”

The Board reviewed the VA coding and rating scheme and members agree that the CI’s heat injuries were incurred while in service and did not “closely represent” petit mal epilepsy. The symptomatology aspect of the hyperthyroid condition is what will form the basis for the Board’s rating recommendation. Rating under VASRD code 7900 takes into consideration the symptoms manifested or need for continuous medication for disease control. There were no STRs evident that documented any physical findings during the acute episodes but there were STRs that documented normal vital signs and temperature with no residual problems in between episodes. CI manifested intermittent elevated heart rate as a symptom only during the acute phase of his heat injury and did not have the tremor or continuous medication requirement as necessary for a 10% rating. Therefore, IAW VASRD §4.31, which states, “in every instance where the schedule does not provide a 0% evaluation for a diagnostic code, a 0% evaluation shall be assigned when the requirements for a compensable evaluation are not met;” this condition warrants a 0% evaluation. 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 adjudication for the heat exhaustion condition.
Contended PEB Conditions. The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that the chronic LBP, bilateral shoulder pain and dysthymic disorder conditions were not unfitting. The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt) standard used for its rating recommendations, and requires a preponderance of evidence. The chronic LBP, bilateral shoulder pain and dysthymic disorder conditions were not profiled prior to entry into the disability evaluation system or implicated in the commander’s statement and the dysthymic disorder condition was specifically judged not to fail retention standards. All were reviewed by the action officer and considered by the Board. There was no performance based evidence from the record that any of these conditions significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the any of the contended conditions and so no additional disability ratings are recommended.


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 heat exhaustion condition and IAW VASRD §4.119, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the contended chronic LBP, bilateral shoulder pain and dysthymic disorder conditions, the Board unanimously recommends no change from the PEB determinations as not unfitting. 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 20140430, 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 , AR20150006377 (PD201402026)

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 | PD2013 00892

    Original file (PD2013 00892.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20060426 Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Heat Exhaustion7999-79000%Isolated Episode of Heath Intolerance7999-7900NSC*20070511Low Back Pain with L5 Mild RadiculopathyNot UnfittingLumbar Strain523710%20070511Migraine HeadachesNot UnfittingMigraines81000%20070511Antisocial Personality DisorderNot UnfittingPTSD and Antisocial Personality Disorder9411NSC**20070529No Additional MEB/PEB EntriesOther x 220070529 Rating: 0%Combined Rating: 30%Derived from...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00948

    Original file (PD2012-00948.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the history of heat stroke condition as unfitting, rated 10% with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). In the matter of the heat condition and IAW VASRD §4.12a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record SFMR-RB MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency (TAPD-ZB / ), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00896

    Original file (PD2011-00896.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the heat stroke with rhabdomyolysis as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and the Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.39. CI CONTENTION : “I got discharged from the U. S. Army due to a Heat Stroke and Rhabdomyolysis. Please review copies of my Army medical records.” In Item #14 (continuation of VA Rating Information), the CI stated: “The Department of Veterans Affairs denied me a rating (0%)...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01307

    Original file (PD2013 01307.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board discussed separate left and right plantar fasciitis conditions and determined that in light of the specific entry noting the inability to wear military footwear for prolonged periods of time would indeed create a situation of not meeting service retention standards even with either foot (alone) having the described plantar fasciitis condition. The Board next considered if a VASRD-compliant bilateral code was applicable, or if the unfitting left foot and unfitting right foot...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03407

    Original file (PD-2014-03407.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The InformalPEBadjudicated “recurrent episodes of heat exhaustion/heat intolerance” including atypical chest pain in its disability descriptionas unfitting, rated 10%,with application of theVA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. 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 recurrent episodes of heat exhaustion and heat intolerance...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01953

    Original file (PD-2013-01953.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBadjudicated “recurrent heat exhaustion” as unfitting, rated 0%, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00170

    Original file (PD2009-00170.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence this condition was unfitting at the time of separation from service. There is no evidence these conditions were unfitting at the time of separation from service. The Board also considered the following conditions and unanimously determined that none were unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied: Residuals, Postoperative Cervical Discectomy and Fusion at C5-C6 and C6-C7, Cervical Disc Disease with Radiculopathy;...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02299

    Original file (PD-2013-02299.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Neck Pain…524310%Degenerative Disc Disease, Cervical Spine5299-524210%20060731Chronic Low Back Pain…524310%Degenerative Disc Disease, Lumbar Spine524210%20060731Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 7 RATING: 20%RATING: 20% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20070215(most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). At pain management visit dated 10 May 2004 the CI reported increased neck and right upper back pain with...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02128

    Original file (PD-2013-02128.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On exam there was TTP of the neck with negative testing for nervecompression (Spurling’s), with normal ROM and normal bilateral UE examination.At the MEB examination on 21 October 2004, 6 months prior to separation, the CI reported chronic neck pain without radicular symptoms. The NARSUM notes the CI had a history of hip pain (trochanteric bursitis), with normal bilateral hip X-rays.Notes in the STR indicated that in April 2000 the CI reported 5 weeks of right hip pain. At the MEB...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00947

    Original file (PD 2012 00947.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY CASE NUMBER: PD1200947 SEPARATION DATE: 20040105 BOARD DATE: 20130307 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (52C10/Air Condition Technician), medically separated for “chronic low back pain due to lumbar disc disease, without neurologic abnormality.” Early in 2002 he experienced sudden...