MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            24 February 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR

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

	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, disability retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his medical board, in spite of his petition, did not consider his anosmia condition.  He notes, in effect, that the condition should have been rated at 10 percent disabling and added to the 20 percent rating that he received.  In support of his request he submits a copy of his 1992 petition requesting that his loss of sense of smell should be addressed as part of the MEB (medical evaluation board) proceedings, copies of extracts from his service medical records and a copy of his MEB findings and recommendation.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He entered active duty on 11 January 1983 and was initially trained in the supply field (specialty 76P).  In 1986 he was reclassified as a chemical operations specialist (specialty 54B) and was promoted to pay grade E-6 in that specialty in November 1987.

According to a 1992 informal line of duty investigation document, the applicant, during a 1989 training exercise at Fort Hood, Texas inhaled a “large amount of CS” when a “CS canister” landed beneath his cot where he was sleeping.  As a result of the incident, the report notes the applicant was treated for “nose bleeding & sore throat.”

Extracts from the applicant’s service medical file, which he provided with his application, indicate he was seen by medical authorities in October 1991 and December 1991.  The notations indicate a history of “gas exposure from which pt[patient] developed anosmia.”  The treatment summaries indicate the applicant had been given a permanent profile, although records available to the Board do not contain any profiles which were referred to in the October and December 1991 medical treatment forms.

However, in February 1992 the applicant was issued a permanent profile (1-1-3-1-1-1) for bilateral “anterior knee pain” for which he was treated in December 1991.  The profile notes the applicant is unable to “take APFT in entirety” but may participate in physical training “at own pace.”

On 30 April 1992 the applicant appeared before a MOS/Medical Retention Board (MMRB) which administratively evaluated the applicant’s abilities to perform the physical requirements of his primary specialty based on his 1-1-3-1-1-1 February 1992 profile.  There is no indication that the applicant’s anosmia condition was raised as an issue impacting the applicant’s ability to perform his military duties.  The MMRB determined that the limitations imposed by the applicant’s permanent profile were so prohibitive that they precluded retraining and reclassification into another specialty and recommended the applicant be referred for disability processing.
In June 1992 the applicant underwent a physical examination in preparation for his Medical Evaluation Board.  The evaluating physician noted the applicant’s anosmia condition and revised his previous physical profile to include his “loss of sense of smell.”  The new profile (3-1-3-1-1-1) now included prohibitions against being exposed to noxious vapors or gases and avoidance of duties that required an intact sense of smell.

The applicant’s MEB noted that his chief complaint was “back pain times six years and bilateral knee pain times two years left greater than right.”  His final diagnosis was 1) mechanical low back pain, 2) bilateral patellofemoral pain syndrome, and 3) bilateral hand pain at the base of the fourth metacarpal, etiology undetermined and the evaluating physician recommended referral to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).

The applicant non-concurred with the MEB findings and in a 14 September 1992 memorandum noted that his anosmia condition was not addressed by the MEB but that it “should be.”  On 16 September 1992 the Deputy Commander for Clinical Services at Fort Hood, Texas noted that “the appeal has been considered and the report of the board is forwarded to [the] PEB” and that “comments are attached as inclosure.”

Documents associated with the applicant’s PEB were not part of the files available to the Board.  However, on 6 January 1993 the PEB proceedings were approved and the applicant’s discharge by reason of disability, with a 20 percent disability rating, was directed.  The applicant was discharged effective 
22 January 1993 and received more than $32,000 in disability severance pay.

According to Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary, anosmia is the “absence of the sense of smell.” 

Army Regulation 635-40 states that conditions which do not render a soldier unfit for military service will not be considered in determining the compensable disability rating unless they contribute to the finding of unfitness.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  Although documents associated with the applicant’s PEB were not in records available to the Board, the evidence provided indicates that the applicant’s objection to the fact that his anosmia condition was not discussed in his MEB was “considered and the report of the board” was forwarded to the PEB.

2.  Additionally, the Board notes that the applicant’s medical records would have been available to the PEB and the applicant would have had an opportunity to raise his concerns about his ansomina condition during the PEB hearing.  The fact that he did not receive a compensable rating for the condition tends to indicate that the condition was not considered unfitting and therefore was not ratable.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___cla___  __jph___  _mvt____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025394	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000224	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Deny	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	108.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.