RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW
NAME: BRANCH OF SERVICE: army
CASE NUMBER: PD0900051 COMPONENT: guard
BOARD DATE: 20090617 SEPARATION DATE: 20080424
________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY OF CASE: This covered individual (CI) was an activated Army Guard E4 Tanker medically separated from the Army in 2008 after. The medical basis for the separation was back pain (herniated disc - HNP at L5-S1). CI originally injured his back in Iraq during action in 2004. Significant symptoms led to surgical correction in 2005. CI reinjured his back during pre-deployment training in May 2007. Imaging showed recurrent HNP at the same level with scaring and nerve root involvement. Despite multiple treatments, back pain and leg symptoms persisted. CI was referred to the PEB for HNP, Anxiety disorder NOS, hypertension (HTN), lipids and a kidney stone. CI was found unfit only for HNP and separated at 20% disability. The PEB originally rated the HNP at 10%; however, the PDA made an administrative change to 20% IAW the changes required by the NDAA which took effect following the PEB and before CI’s service separation. The VA rated the HNP at 40%, diagnosed and rated Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) at 50% (in place of Anxiety disorder), and also rated CI’s left shoulder at 20% and Migraine headaches at 30% for a combined VA rating of 80%. The CI contends that the new NDAA rules were not applied, and that the VA rated the same condition (HNP) higher at 40% and determined surgery (spinal fusion) was needed. CI also contended that ‘PEB said another surgery would increase rating by 10% and if done w/in 3 years, he should present evidence to the BCMR for review.’
________________________________________________________________
BOARD FINDINGS: IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication. The Board clearly noted that the Army PDA administratively changed the PEB’s original 10% determination to 20% IAW NDAA. The Army-diagnosed and adjudicated ‘Anxiety Disorder, NOS’ was listed as ‘rule out PTSD’ in many notes; However, the PEB, STR notes, CC memo and CI do not indicate that PTSD should be added as an unfitting condition. HTN, Hyperlipidemia and kidney stones were all found not unfitting. The focus of this case is CI’s lower back problem and residuals. The Army PA re-rating appeared to be due to removal of the ‘pain rule’ for limited lumbosacral flexion. The PEB Disability Description (8b of DA Form 199) listed ‘parasthesias in the lower extremities’, but neither coded or rated them separately. There was discussion regarding the probative values of the various ROM determinations. The NARSUM appeared to use the evaluation of 20070824 which was pre-NDAA. The pre-discharge VA exam (Feb 2008) demonstrated a much more pain-limited thoracolumbar flexion. It was opined that the exam was closer to the time of discharge, was detailed, and aside from flexion nearly mirrored the Army measured ROMs which added credence to the VA examination. There was not a detailed peripheral neuromuscular VA exam and the VA did not consider or rate lower extremity parasthesias. The mild lower extremity parasthesias and radicular pain were noted as markers of increased severity of the spine disease, but the Board determined that they should not be rated at a compensable level separately. The Board determined that the CI’s HNP rating should be increased to 40% using the more current and complete ROMs from the VA exam.
The single voter for dissent (recommended no recharacterization) and elected not to submit a minority opinion.
________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION: The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation.
| Unfitting Condition | VASRD Code | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| HNP, s/p diskectomy lumbar spine | 5243-5242 | 40% |
| Combined | 40% |
________________________________________________________________
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20090121, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record.
Exhibit C. Department of Veteran's Affairs Treatment Record.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00134
The CI was medically separated with a combined disability rating of 20%. Disc Disease L4/5…524120%20080717LLE Radicular Pain > Combined with back rating.20070531Radiculopathy, LLE5241-852010%20080717↓No Additional DA 3947 Entries.↓Degen. The Board, therefore, recommends that it be rated as an additionally unfitting condition.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00032
Lower Back Condition . The Board considered whether the PEB removal of an unfitting sciatica was deliberate and if additional permanent rating could be recommended under a peripheral nerve code, as conferred by the FPEB for TDRL entry, for the sciatic radiculopathy at separation. The Board concluded therefore that the left sciatic radiculopathy condition could not be recommended for additional disability rating.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00036
Right Shoulder Condition . The treatment of this muscle wound, including immobilization, was adjudged to have led to the CI’s primary unfitting conditions of “Right Shoulder Flexion Contracture and Adhesive Capsulitis.” The treatment record and NARSUM detail there was generalized disability to the right upper extremity beyond the shoulder joint and “right shoulder flexion contracture.” The Commander’s statement specifically mentions the right elbow: “physically incapable of reasonably...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01174
I would like to be rated for other medical conditions as well. As an example, one examiner documented that the CI “moaned and groaned throughout the exam;” and, frankly stated in the CI’s report that he “seems to be able to handle his pain with ibuprofen, which is disproportionate to the amount of pain he expressed today.” It is also noted that 13 months post separation, after the final lumbar spine disability rating, the VA records documented improvement of lumbar ROMs to approximately 50%...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00107
The medical basis for the separation was chronic low back pain (LBP) with a tethered spinal cord. The VA noted increased radicular pain (from the military exam) to the right leg and granted a 10% rating effective 20060830 "the date of the VA exam as there was no medical evidence showing a diagnosis for this condition prior to VA examination." The CI's radicular pain was considered by the PEB and found not to be unfitting.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00915
The Service ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases. The Board considered that both the PEB’s anxiety disorder and the CI’s noted VA PTSD diagnosis are mental health conditions with similar standards of fitness and use the same VA rating criteria of §4.130. In addition to the CI’s spinal fusion condition 40% rating, the CI should also be found unfit and rated for his mental health condition.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00424
Hip Condition . In the matter of the hip condition, the Board unanimously recommends permanent separation rating of 10% for each hip, coded 5299-5255 IAW VASRD §4.40, §4.45, §4.59, and §4.71a. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay.
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00458
Back Condition. The Board also considered a rating under the code 5293; the record supported “moderate; recurring attacks,” for a 20% rating. The CI’s medical records document a headache condition.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01686
The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) and, to review those fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) consistent with performance-based criteria in evidence at separation. IAW DoDI 6040.44, this Board must consider the appropriate rating for the CI’s back condition at separation based on the VASRD...
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-00175
On the physical examination, the NARSUM noted a well-healed scar, limited neck motion due to pain, but “no limitation of movement” of upper extremities, without weakness, including both shoulders. The IPEB (5 months prior to separation) adjudicated that the neck and shoulder condition was unfitting, noting normal EMG and full strength, but with decreased cervical range-of-motion (ROM) due to pain. §4.71a Rating 10 % 10%The Board directed attention to its rating recommendationbased on the...