RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 March 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050012770


      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:

|     |Ms. Kathleen A. Newman            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Larry W. Racster              |     |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 (now deceased) requested, in effect, that his records be
corrected to show he was diagnosed with a malignant tumor while he was in
the Army and that his separation with a zero percent disability rating be
changed to a medical retirement.

2.  The applicant stated he was experiencing abdominal and right testicular
pain while he was stationed in Germany.  A testicular ultrasound was within
normal limits.  There was no further evaluation for his lower abdominal
pain.  He was sent back to his duty station and given a physical profile.
A Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated in April 2004 and he was
medically discharged due to chronic pain.  The pain continued to worsen
and, since his wife was then his sponsor, he was admitted to a civilian
Germany hospital with severe abdominal pain.  At that time he was diagnosed
with pancreatitis.  It was not until this hospital admission that a
computed tomography (CT) scan of the abdomen and pelvis revealed a 10
centimeter sarcoma pressing against his bladder.  He was medically
evacuated to Walter Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) and underwent surgery
to remove the tumor.  The pathology was returned malignant.

3.  The applicant's father states they are very much grieved by the
applicant's untimely passing and would greatly appreciate an expedited
processing of his request for an accurate military discharge.  The
applicant was very upset by the manner in which he was discharged from the
Army and the implications of the chronic pain discharge.

4.  The applicant provided an 11 August 2005 letter from his WRAMC doctor;
an amended laboratory report dated 2 November 2004; his DD Form 214
(Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); and his Physical
Evaluation Board (PEB) packet.  His father provided the applicant's death
certificate and a copy of the 11 August 2005 letter from the applicant's
WRAMC doctor along with a diagram of the applicant's tumor with the
doctor's estimate of its size at the time of the applicant's separation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 March 2003.

2.  The applicant's DD Form 2807-1 (Report of Medical History), dated
         1 December 2003, indicated the applicant had "chronic groin pain –
hurt in      basic training."

3.  The applicant's MEB Narrative Summary indicated the applicant had a
history of chronic right testicular pain that began while running a
physical training test just before basic training in March 2003.  His pain
was described as a dull ache that was worse with physical activity and at
the end of the day.  A physical examination revealed he was in no apparent
distress.  A urological examination was normal.  A scrotal ultrasound with
duplex doppler was unremarkable.  On    12 December 2003, he was referred
to a PEB for a diagnosis of chronic right testicular pain, unresolved.  On
23 December 2003, the applicant agreed with the MEB's findings and
recommendation.

4.  On 29 December 2003, the applicant was given a permanent L-3 physical
profile due to chronic testicle pain with assignment limitations of no
bending, no heavy lifting, no [wearing of] load-bearing vest, no standing
for more than one hour, and no physical training.

5.  On 15 January 2004, an informal PEB found the applicant unfit due to
chronic right testicular pain with a negative workup, physical examination
within normal limits, no history of trauma, and no sleep disturbance.  The
applicant was rated for pain.  He was given a zero percent disability
rating.  On 26 January 2004, the applicant concurred and waived a formal
hearing of his case.

6.  On 13 April 2004, the applicant was discharged with severance pay due
to disability.  He had completed 1 year and 26 days of creditable active
service.

7.  In August 2004, the applicant apparently underwent a CT scan which
showed a large pelvic mass.  In November 2004, a biopsy taken from the
pelvic mass suggested a malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumor.

8.  In an 11 August 2005 letter, the applicant's WRAMC doctor stated it was
highly probable the applicant's pelvic pain for which he was discharged was
due to the high-grade malignant retroperitoneal sarcoma which was diagnosed
only four months after his discharge.  On the tumor diagram he provided,
the doctor noted that, as the tumor was very large on diagnosis, it was
almost certainly in a slow growth stage due to inadequate blood supply.

9.  The applicant died on 28 August 2005.

10.  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.  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.

11.  Army Regulation 635-40 states that, when considering EPTS (existed
prior to service) cases involving aggravation by active service, the rating
will reflect only the degree of disability over and above the degree
existing at the time of entrance into the active service, less natural
progression occurring during active service.  This will apply whether the
particular condition was noted at the time of entrance into active service
or is determined upon the evidence of record or accepted medical principles
to have existed at that time.  EPTS conditions frequently become unfitting
through natural progression and should not be assigned a disability rating
unless service-aggravated complications are clearly documented.

12.  Army Regulation 635-40 states that occasionally a medical condition
which causes or contributes to unfitness for military service is of such a
mild degree that it does not meet the criteria for even the lowest rating
provided in the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating
Disabilities.  A zero percent rating will be applied in those cases.

13.  The National Institutes of Health internet site Medlineplus.gov states
a doctor may order a CT scan when confirming a diagnosis of pancreatitis
(whose symptoms include abdominal pain that may spread to the back).

14.  The same internet site states, in diagnosing testicular cancer, an
ultrasound can help doctors tell if a mass is solid or fluid filled.  CT
scans are useful in staging the cancer (determining the extent of its
spread).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board has carefully considered the applicant's, and his father's,
contentions.

2.  The Army has an interest in promoting the reliability of its medical
records.  Alteration of a diagnosis in those records after the fact may
lead to fundamental questions about the veracity of the records in this
case and in general.  For these reasons, the Board declines to alter a
diagnosis in the applicant’s medical records.  The Secretary’s interest is
in ensuring an orderly system in which a physician makes certain
observations and records them faithfully in the medical
records at the time.  It would take an extraordinary showing for the Board
to alter such a diagnosis.  In this case, the applicant’s physician made a
diagnosis in good faith.  That observation was duly recorded in the
applicant’s medical records.

3.  It is recognized that the applicant was diagnosed with a malignant
tumor about 4 to 6 months after his discharge from the Army.  However, that
is insufficient evidence to show the Army was negligent in making its
diagnosis.

4.  As the applicant himself noted, a civilian German hospital initially
diagnosed him with pancreatitis.  Symptoms of pancreatitis are abdominal
pain that may spread to the back.  The applicant's MEB Narrative Summary
indicated only that he had testicular pain.  The applicant agreed with the
MEB's findings.  A CT scan is one of the tools a doctor may use in
confirming a diagnosis of pancreatitis.  It is not a normal tool when
confirming the cause of testicular pain.

5.  The applicant's WRAMC doctor stated it was highly probable the
applicant's pelvic pain for which he was discharged was due to the high-
grade malignant retroperitoneal sarcoma which was diagnosed only four
months after the applicant's discharge.  If it was a concern of the
applicant, or a current concern of the applicant's father, to have the
medical records changed to obtain a service-connection rating from the
Department of Veterans Affairs or benefits from some other agency, those
agencies should feel free to consider the doctor's statement as they see
fit.  It is not, however, sufficient to change the Army's April 2004
diagnosis.

6.  To even consider changing the Army's April 2004 diagnosis would bring
up another issue.

7.  According to the applicant's MEB Narrative Summary, the applicant had a
history of chronic right testicular pain that began just before basic
training in March 2003.  The applicant's WRAMC doctor noted, on the tumor
diagram he provided, that, as the tumor was very large on diagnosis, it was
almost certainly in a slow growth stage due to inadequate blood supply.
Based upon these two indicators, a legitimate question arises as to whether
the applicant already had the tumor at the time he enlisted.  As an EPTS
condition, the applicant would still have been discharged from the Army,
only not with a zero percent rating and severance pay but with no
disability rating at all and no severance pay.

8.  Regretfully, there is insufficient evidence on which to grant the
relief requested.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__kan___  __lcb___  __lwr___  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.




                                  __Kathleen A. Newman__
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050012770                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060314                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |108.01                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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