RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2015-00817
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Army	SEPARATION DATE:  20051215

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Infantry, medically separated for “bilateral high frequency hearing loss” with a disability rating of 0%.

CI CONTENTION:  “Review all conditions.”  The CI’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44.  It is limited to those conditions determined by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) to be unfitting for continued military service and when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the PEB, but determined to be not unfitting.  Any conditions outside the Board’s defined scope of review and any contention not requested in this application may remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records.  Furthermore, the Board’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections, where appropriate.  The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is based upon a 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 the time of separation.  The Board has neither the role nor the authority to compensate for post-separation progression or complications of service-connected conditions.  That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set of laws.  The Board gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation.

RATING COMPARISON:

SERVICE PEB – 20051021	VARD - 20060113	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Bilateral High Frequency Hearing Loss	6100	0%	Bilateral Hearing Impairment	6100	0%	20050815	
Traumatic Arthritis of Right Wrist	Not Unfitting	Traumatic Arthritis, Right Wrist	5215	0%	20050815	
Osteoarthritis of Cervical Spine	Not Unfitting	Osteoarthritis, Cervical Spine	5242	0%	20050815	
COMBINED RATING:  0%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  0%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Bilateral Hearing Loss.  According to service treatment records (STR) and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s bilateral hearing loss was identified by a screening audiogram (hearing test).  The accession audiogram is not in evidence; the first record in evidence is the reference audiogram accomplished on 3 February 2003.  The CI was issued hearing protection and returned to duty.  The CI was identified as having an H3 profile after the 28 April 2005 screening audiogram (charted below) and referred for an MOS Medical Retention Board (MMRB).  The commander’s letter dated 9 June 2005 noted satisfactory duty performance, but duty impairment from his hearing in voice communications, tactical telephone communications, and moving under direct fire.  An MMRB on 24 June 2005 recommended MEB in lieu of cross-training (which the CI desired).  The MEB forwarded “moderate to severe high-frequency hearing loss in both ears” for PEB adjudication.  At the 15 August 2005 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) evaluation, performed 4 months before separation, the CI reported difficulty hearing (his) baby crying.  No other difficulties were reported.  He also noted that he had been advised that he needed hearing aids.  The examination of the ears were normal.  His hearing is charted below.  His word recognition was fair/good.  The MEB NARSUM was dated 29 September 2005, 3 months prior to separation.  The CI denied tinnitus or dizziness.  He reported minimal changes in his level of hearing and in his ability to hear conversations or background noises.  The physical examination on the Standard Form 2808 dated 10 August 2005 was checked normal.  The hearing values in evidence are charted below.  

Date	500	1000	2000	3000	4000	6000	
Right Ear	
20030203	15	20	10	25	55	55	
20040819	10	0	10	45	65	75	
20050428	20	20	20	50	65	65	
20050810	10	15	15	50	70	70	
Change	-5	5	5	25	15	15	
20050815	VA:  72% word recognition	50	70	70	
Left Ear	
20030203	15	20	15	35	60	65	
20040819	15	0	10	50	70	65	
20050428	20	20	20	50	70	60	
20050810	15	10	20	55	70	70	
Change	0	-10	5	20	10	5	
20050815	VA:  84% word recognition	55	70	70	

The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. Both the PEB and VA rated the bilateral hearing loss condition 0%, coded 6100 (hearing impairment).  The Board considered the evidence.  The pure tone average for the right ear was (150/4) 37.50 dB with a word discrimination of 72%.  This equates to Roman Numeral IV.  The left ear pure tone average was (155/4) 38.75 with a word discrimination of 84%.  This equates to Roman Numeral II.  In accordance with VASRD §4.85 and Tables VI, VIA, and VII, this supports the 0% rating assigned by both the PEB and VA.  The CI denied the presence of tinnitus; accordingly, a rating under the code 6260 (recurrent tinnitus) is not supported either.  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 bilateral hearing loss condition.  

Contended PEB Conditions:  Traumatic Arthritis of Right Wrist and Osteroarthritis of Cervical Spine.  The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that the contended conditions were not unfitting.  Neither of the conditions was profiled or implicated in the commander’s statement.  Both were judged to meet retention standards.  There was no performance-based evidence from the record that either of the conditions significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance at separation.  After due deliberation, the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for either of the contended conditions and so no additional disability ratings are recommended.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the bilateral high frequency hearing loss condition and IAW VASRD §4.85, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  In the matter of the contended traumatic arthritis of right wrist and osteroarthritis of cervical spine 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.  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 , w/atchs
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record

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 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20170000793 (PD201500817)

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:

Enclosure

CF: 
(  ) DoD PDBR
(  ) DVA