Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004102727C070208
Original file (2004102727C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            9 September 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2004102727


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Vick                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that her medical condition be found to not have
existed prior to service (EPTS).

2.  The applicant makes no additional statement.

3.  The applicant provides her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 2 May 2000; her Medical
Evaluation Board (MEB) proceedings; her Physical Evaluation Board (PEB)
proceedings; a pulmonary function test report; an Army National Guard
Retirement Points History Statement; and her active duty orders.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's records are not available.  The information contained
herein was obtained from documents provided by the applicant and from her
DD Form 214 for the period ending 17 October 2003.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard on 27 August 1999.
She completed initial active duty for training on 2 May 2000 and was
awarded military occupational specialty 62F (Crane Operator).

3.  The applicant provided a document from United Hospital Center,
Incorporated
dated 6 December 2002 which indicates she was diagnosed with asthma on that
date.  The document also indicates that her mother and brother have asthma.

4.  In March 2003, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of
Operation Enduring Freedom.

5.  The applicant was evaluated by an MEB on 5 September 2003.  The MEB
Narrative Summary noted that she had recently been diagnosed with asthma
and was on medication.  The doctor evaluating her indicated some concern
that her civilian job as a laundry worker in a nursing home might possibly
be exacerbating her asthma.  She indicated that she could march one mile
but her asthma stopped her from wearing MOPP (mission-oriented protective
posture, i.e., gas mask and other chemical/biological weapons protective
gear) equipment.  She sometimes had trouble with running, swimming, or
walking long distances.  She rarely missed work or school and she had not
visited the emergency room.

6.  The MEB referred the applicant to a PEB with a diagnosis of asthma,
EPTS.  It was indicated on the DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board
Proceedings) that she desired to continue on active duty.  On 9 September
2003, she agreed with the MEB's findings and recommendation.

7.  On 19 September 2003, a PEB found the applicant to be physically unfit
due to asthma, EPTS and not permanently aggravated by service.  The PEB
recommended she be separated without disability benefits.  The reverse of
the DA Form 199 (Physical Evaluation Board Proceedings) is not available
(the side that would indicate if she concurred or nonconcurred in the
finding and recommendation).

8.  On 17 October 2003, the applicant was discharged by reason of
disability, EPTS, PEB.

9.  Army Regulation 635-40 governs the evaluation of physical fitness of
soldiers who may be unfit to perform their military duties because of
physical disability.  The regulation defines “physically unfit” as
unfitness due to physical disability.  Under the laws governing the Army
Physical Disability Evaluation System, soldiers who sustain or aggravate
physically unfitting disabilities must meet several line of duty criteria
to be eligible to receive retirement and severance pay benefits.  The
disability must have been incurred or aggravated while the soldier was
entitled to basic pay or was the proximate cause of performing active duty
or inactive duty training.  The disability must not have resulted from the
soldier’s intentional misconduct or willful neglect.  The disability must
not have been incurred during a period of unauthorized absence.

10.  Army Regulation 635-40 also states that, according to accepted medical
principles, certain abnormalities and residual conditions exist that, when
discovered, lead to the conclusion that they must have existed or have
started before the individual entered the military service.  Examples are
congenital malformations and hereditary conditions or similar conditions in
which medical authorities are in such consistent and universal agreement as
to their cause and time of origin that no additional confirmation is needed
to support the conclusion that they existed prior to military service.

11.  The National Institutes of Health Internet site medlineplus.gov
contains numerous topics sites on asthma.  Several of those sites indicate
that asthma  has a genetic link:  One site indicated that no one knows
exactly what causes asthma but it is thought to be a combination of
environmental and genetic (hereditary) factors.  Another site indicated
that some people have a genetic predisposition to react to certain
allergens.  Another site indicated that asthma is what is known as a
"complex" heritable disease (that there are a number of genes that
contribute toward a person's susceptibility to a disease, and in the case
of asthma, chromosomes 5, 6, 11, 14, and 12 have all been implicated).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant provides none to show
her asthma was incurred or aggravated while she was on active duty or
otherwise entitled to basic pay.  The available evidence, the 6 December
2002 medical document provided by her, indicates that she was diagnosed
with asthma on that date.

2.  In addition, there is some evidence that asthma is a genetic condition.
 It is noted that the applicant's mother and brother also suffer from
asthma.  There was also some indication that her civilian job may have
exacerbated her asthma.

3.  Based on the above, there is insufficient evidence on which to
determine that the applicant's medical condition was not EPTS.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jev___  __jea___  __lds___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




            __James E. Vick_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004101727                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040909                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.03                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050018217C070206

    Original file (20050018217C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His retinitis pigmentosa was determined to be congenital, existing prior to his entrance onto active duty with no aggravation by his military service. The opinion states the applicant's disability processing was proper and the preponderance of evidence did not support the applicant's request. Preponderance of evidence is defined as that degree of proof necessary to fully satisfy the board members that there is greater than a 50% probability that the disease was neither incurred during nor...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00090

    Original file (PD2011-00090.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was also found unfit for dysthymic disorder and ulcerative colitis. PTSD Condition . The Board discussed at length whether ulcerative colitis was permanently service aggravated and subject to rating or existed prior to service as a condition that is known to have exacerbations that are not related to service and thus not eligible for rating.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01577

    Original file (PD-2013-01577.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The right foot and back conditions, characterized by the MEB as “continued pain status post (s/p) excision of nonunion fragment right 5th metatarsal” and “low back pain,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086517C070212

    Original file (2003086517C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    She also requests that she receive back retirement pay from the date of her separation and that the Line of Duty (LOD) investigation, dated 26 October 1984, be incorporated in her military records. Title 10, United States Code, section 1203, provides for the physical disability separation of a member who has less than 20 years service and a disability rated at less than 30 percent. The Board considered the applicant's request that the LOD investigation, dated 26 October 1984, be...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002073073C070403

    Original file (2002073073C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 April 1996, the Army Recruiting Command Surgeon indicated she was medically disqualified, but granted the applicant a medical waiver for her history of asthma with a physical profile of 211111B. It was also noted by members of the MMRB that she had this medical condition prior to military service. It also provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017195

    Original file (20110017195.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant states, in effect, her medical condition did not exist prior to service and she cannot qualify for Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits with the current narrative reason for separation listed as "Disability, existed prior to service" on her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty). The applicant requests the narrative reason for her separation be corrected to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024660

    Original file (20100024660.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states his records show his asthma was a not a pre-existing condition. He did have asthma, but he did not have it prior to service. There is also no evidence of record and he provided insufficient evidence to show his asthma did not exist prior to his entry on active duty in 2004.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00150

    Original file (PD 2013 00150.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There were limited MH treatment notes in the records before the Board, but the available records support that the two sets of symptoms waxed and waned together.The CI developed a non-MH condition treated with steroid medications that reportedly caused weight gain and/or inhibited mandatory weight loss to meet Navy physical standards.The Board noted that during the time that the CI wastreated with steroids, she had an exacerbation of depression symptoms leading to an inpatient hospitalization...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087261C070212

    Original file (2003087261C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    When the applicant was being boarded by a formal Physical Evaluation Board (PEB), her counsel’s request for a continuance so the applicant could have another physical examination was denied. Although the applicant was disabled when she was released from active duty on 18 September 1997, she was not given incapacitation pay until 15 February 1998. When taking these facts and applying them to the applicant’s request for incapacitation pay, there is no indication that the applicant was unable...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078065C070215

    Original file (2002078065C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He has indicated to me that he will take medication if he has to." Chapter 4 of that regulation provides the conditions under which Army Reserve officers may be discharged from their status as Reserves of the Army. As such, if the applicant was considered by an MEB and PEB, all indications are that he would have been separated without disability benefits.