BOARD DATE: 27 October 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110009298 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of her earlier petition for an increase in her disability rating. 2. The applicant states she is requesting the Board to consider the new evidence she is submitting which she believes supports her request that her disability rating be increased to 100 percent. 3. The applicant provides the following documents in support of her request: * DA Form 3947 (Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Proceedings) * narrative summary (NARSUM), dated 4 December 2007 * cardiologist's letters, dated 30 March 2006 and 30 January 2007 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR201000016158 on 25 January 2011. 2. During its original review of the case, the Board found no evidence suggesting the applicant's heart condition met the criteria for a 100-percent disability rating or that the applicant was improperly rated by the physical evaluation board (PEB). 3. A NARSUM completed on 4 December 2007 shows the applicant underwent implantation of a dual chamber pacemaker/defibrillator in November 2006. The laboratory and x-ray data showed her October 2007 echocardiogram showed dilated cardiomyopathy with moderate to severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction with an ejection fraction between 30 and 35 percent. A resting multigated acquisition (MUGA) scan in October 2007 showed the calculated left ventricular ejection fraction was found to be 69 percent compared with a study done a year prior of 52 percent. 4. On 5 December 2007, an MEB convened at Fort Gordon, Georgia, and evaluated the applicant's case. The MEB determined the applicant's diagnosed conditions of "dilated cardiomyopathy with ejection fraction of 69 percent failed to meet regulatory medical retention standards. The MEB recommended the applicant's case be referred to a PEB. 5. On 4 January 2008, the applicant concurred with the findings and recommendations of the MEB. 6. On 28 January 2008, an informal PEB found the applicant physically unfit due to dilated cardiomyopathy confirmed by echocardiogram in October 2007 with an ejection fraction between 30 to 35 percent under Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) code 7020 (Cardiomyopathy). The informal PEB findings were reconsidered based on the October 2007 echocardiogram, a 16 October 2007 MUGA scan, and conversations with the applicant's cardiologist. The PEB rescinded the 9 January 2008 PEB proceedings and recommended a disability rating of 60 percent. 7. On 13 May 2008, the applicant was retired by reason of physical disability with a 60-percent disability rating. 8. The VASRD is the standard under which percentage rating decisions are to be made for disabled personnel. The VASRD outlines guidelines for members determined to be unfit under VASRD code 7020 and states that members will be assigned a 100-percent disability rating when there is an ejection fraction of less than 30 percent. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request that the 60-percent disability rating assigned by the PEB be changed to 100 percent has been carefully considered. However, there is insufficient evidence to support her request. 2. The VASRD guidelines for assigning a disability rating under VASRD code 7020 provides for a 100-percent disability rating when there is an ejection fraction of less than 30 percent. The evidence of record in this case, including the NARSUM the applicant submits as new evidence, confirms her 2007 echocardiogram and MUGA scan recorded an ejection fraction of 30 to 35 percent. As a result, it appears the medical evidence at the time of her PEB evaluation did not support a 100-percent disability rating under VASRD guidelines. Subsequent findings by the VA does not call into question the validity of the medical findings at the time of the applicant's PEB processing or retirement from active duty. As a result, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief or amendment of the original Board findings in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X__ ___X_____ _____X___ 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR201000016158, dated 25 January 2011. __________X_______________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110009298 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110009298 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1