Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00562
Original file (PD-2012-00562.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

  BRANCH OF SERVICE:  ARMY 
  SEPARATION DATE:  20020402 

 
NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200562 
BOARD DATE:  20121220 
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E‐4 (95B10/Military Police), medically separated 
for a right foot condition following injury to the sesamoid bone of the great toe (hallux).  The CI 
did not improve adequately with surgical and post rehabilitative treatment to meet the physical 
requirements of her Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), worldwide deployment standards 
or physical fitness standards.  She was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical 
Evaluation  Board  (MEB).    Chronic  right  foot  pain  was  forwarded  to  the  Physical  Evaluation 
Board (PEB) IAW AR 40‐501.  No other condition was forward by the MEB.  The PEB adjudicated 
the  chronic  right  foot  pain  following  injury  to  the  sesamoid  bone,  status  post  (s/p)  tibial 
sesamoid  excision  with  continued  area  pain  condition  as  unfitting  rated  0%,  with  likely 
application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).  The CI made no 
appeals, and was medically separated with a 0% disability rating.   
 
 
CI  CONTENTION:  “ISSUE  THAT  FOUND  ME  UNFIT  WAS  RESIDUALS  OF  RIGHT  FOOT 
INJURY…..THIS  DOESNT  [SP]  INCLUDE  THE  DAMAGE  TO  THE  RIGHT  ANKLE,  LEFT  ANKLE  AND 
FOOT, RIGHT AND LEFT KNEES, BACK, RIGHT SHOULDER OR MIGRAINES.” 
 
 
SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board wishes to clarify that the scope of its review as defined in DoDI 
6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e. (2) is limited to those conditions which were determined 
by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued military service; or, when requested by the 
CI, those condition(s) “identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB.”  The ratings 
for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in all cases.  The right foot condition as requested for 
consideration meet the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 for Board purview; and, is addressed 
below.      The  other  requested  conditions  [right  ankle,  left  ankle  and  foot,  left  knee  and right 
shoulder], and the remaining conditions rated by the VA at separation [right knee, low back and 
migraines] are not within the Board’s purview.  Any conditions or contention not requested in 
this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for 
future consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records. 
 
 
RATING COMPARISON:   
 

VA (~16 Mos. Post‐Separation) – All Effective Date 20020403

Code 

Rating 

Exam

Service IPEB – Dated 20020225 
Condition 

Code 

Rating

Chronic Right Foot Pain 
Following Injury To The 
Sesamoid Bone, Status 
Post Tibial Sesamoid 
Excision with Continued 
Area Pain 

5299‐5003 

0% 

 

↓No Addi(cid:415)onal MEB/PEB Entries↓ 

Condition

Residuals of Right Foot Injury, 
Status Post Tibial 
Sesamoid Excision For Fracture 
of Sesamoid Bone, with 
Aggravation of Metatarsus 
Varus and Hallux Valgus 
With Bunion, Also Claimed As 
Right Great Toe Condition
Migraines
Chronic Right Patellofemoral 
Syndrome with Mild 
Patellar Tendonitis

5284 

20%* 

20030909 

8100 

5261 

30% 

10% 

20030909
20030909

Chronic Mild Lumbar Muscular 
Spasms, Secondary To 
Spinal Anesthesia

5295 

10% 

20030909

Combined:  0% 

Combined:  60% 

*Initial VARD assigned a 10% then increased to 20% from 20030909 exam. 
 
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:   
 
Right  Foot  Condition.    In  November  2000,  while  on  patrol,  the  CI  stepped  in  a  pothole  and 
injured her right foot.  She was conservatively treated by orthopedics for a confirmed fracture 
on a bone scan of the sesamoid bone in her right great toe.  She was intermittently returned to 
duty  but  her  pain  persisted,  especially  with  running,  walking  thus  she  opted  for  definitive 
surgical care with excision of fragments.  The postoperative care was uneventful yet her pain 
persisted despite 6 more months of conservative, rehabilitative care.  The permanent profile 
identified foot surgery as the medical condition with the following limitations; walk at own pace 
and distance, no walking on uneven terrain and no physical training testing.  The commander’s 
statement additionally documented her inability; to climb in and out of vehicles, do foot patrols 
or chase subjects which were duties of her MOS.  The commander further documented she was 
working  a  desk  job  and  had  numerous  appointments  preventing  her  from  completing  her 
assigned desk duties. 
 
At the MEB exam, 2 months prior to separation, the CI reported; right foot pain, 5 to 7 of 10 in 
intensity depending on her activities, she walked with a limp, wore a controlled ankle motion 
(CAM) walker to protect her foot, was unable to climb up or down stairs or jump without pain, 
and she was performing a sedentary job.  The MEB physical exam demonstrated a well healed 
surgical scar of the right great toe with tenderness and decrease sensation near the scar and 
otherwise normal ankle ROM.  The exam was silent to the ROM of the right great toe, gait or 
CAM walker use.  X‐rays revealed excision of the tibial sesamoid and normal bone stock.  The 
examiner diagnosed chronic right foot pain.   
 
The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  This 
rating includes consideration of functional loss lAW VASRD §4.10 (functional impairment), §4.40 
(functional  loss),  §4.45  (DeLuca),  and  §4.59  (painful  motion).    The  earliest  VA  Compensation 
and Pension (C&P) exam was performed 17 months after separation.  The VA’s original rating 
decision utilized the MEB and service treatment record (STR) as their evidence.  The Board’s 
operative instruction, DoDI 6040.44, specifies a 12‐month interval for special consideration to 
VA findings.  This does not mean that the later VA evidence was disregarded, but the Board’s 
recommendations are directed to the severity and fitness implications of conditions at the time 
of separation.  The PEB and VA chose different coding options for the condition IAW §4.71a—
Schedule of ratings–musculoskeletal system which had significant implications on the rating for 
the Board to consider.  The PEB assigned a 0% rating under the 5003 (arthritis, degenerative) 
for no loss of motion of the contiguous joint.   While this is supported by the criteria of that 
code,  the  Board  notes  the  evidence  is  silent  to  ROM  or  painful  motion  of  the  great  toe  and 
therefore  IAW  VASRD  §4.7  (higher  of  two  evaluations),  agreed  to  examine  the  documented 
ratable data and its applicability to other VASRD codes which would achieve a higher rating in 
consideration of VASRD §4.10 and §4.40.  The Board considered rating analogous to the more 
clinically  specific  code  5280  (Hallux  valgus,  unilateral)  and  recognizes  a  10%  rating  is  the 
maximum  allowable  with  this  code.    The  Board  also  considered  the  VA’s  chosen  code  5284 
(Foot  injuries,  other)  and  agreed  the  pain  evidence  does  not  approach  the  ‘severe’  criteria 
under the 5284 and clearly meets the ‘moderate criteria’.  The Board notes the VA’s original 
decision assigned 10% rating for moderate pain and did not meet the threshold of ‘moderately 
severe’ symptoms with the MEB evidence.  The Board further recognizes the VA rating decision 
retroactive  to  the  date  of  separation,  subsumed  worsening  disease  with  citation  of  further 

   2                                                           PD1200562 
 

surgery in August 2002 and subsumed the prior fracture of the sesamoid bone from the service 
to allow a 20% rating for ‘moderate severe’ symptoms.  The Board deliberations surrounded 
‘moderate’ versus ‘moderate severe’.  The Board notes the VA physical exam is consistent with 
the  moderately  severe  criteria,  however  is  inconsistent  with  her  employment  history  as  a 
fulltime  racquetball  director  fulltime  without  loss  of  time  from  work.    Therefore  the  Board 
agreed  the  condition  at  the  time  of  separation  best  fits  the  ‘moderate’  criteria.    After  due 
deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the 
Board recommends a disability rating of 10% for the right foot condition.   
 
 
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  did  not 
surmise  from  the  record  or  PEB  ruling  in  this  case  that  any  prerogatives  outside  the  VASRD 
were exercised.  In the matter of the right foot condition, the Board unanimously recommends 
a disability rating of 10%, coded 5299‐5284 IAW VASRD §4.71a.  There were no other conditions 
within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.   
 
 
RECOMMENDATION:  The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as 
follows, effective as of the date of her prior medical separation:   
 

UNFITTING CONDITION

Chronic Right Foot Pain Following Injury To The Sesamoid Bone, 
Status Post Tibial Sesamoid Excision with Continued Area Pain

VASRD CODE  RATING
10% 
5299‐5284 
COMBINED 
10%

 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20120606, w/atchs 
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record 
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

           XXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF 
           President 
           Physical Disability Board of Review 

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency  

(TAPD‐ZB / XXXXXXXXXX), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA  22202‐3557 

SUBJECT:  Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation  

for XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20130000633 (AR201200562) 

 
 

 
 

 
 

   3                                                           PD1200562 
 

1.  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 to modify the individual’s disability rating to 10% without recharacterization 

of the individual’s separation.  This decision is final.   

2.  I direct that all the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected 

accordingly no later than 120 days from the date of this memorandum.    

3.  I request that a copy of the corrections and any related correspondence be provided to the 
individual concerned, counsel (if any), any Members of Congress who have shown interest, and 

to the Army Review Boards Agency with a copy of this memorandum without enclosures. 

 BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 
CF:  

Encl 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

     XXXXXXXXXXX 

     Deputy Assistant Secretary 
         (Army Review Boards) 

 

(  ) DoD PDBR 

(  ) DVA 

   4                                                           PD1200562 
 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00755

    Original file (PD2011-00755.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW Right Foot Condition. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01261

    Original file (PD-2013-01261.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DoDI 6040.44 provides for consideration of post-separation VA findings, particularly within 12 months of separation, although the Board’s recommendation is premised on the degree of disability at separation. The VA’s (belated) 10% rating was under code 5284 (foot injuries, other) for “moderate disability,” which offers a 20% rating for “moderately severe” and 30% for “severe.”Members agreed, that IAW VASRD §4.7 (higher of two evaluations), 5003 was not the optimal code for rating in this...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02429

    Original file (PD-2013-02429.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to 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. Bilateral Sesamoiditis and Back Pain5099-500310%Bilateral Foot Condition5299-52780%20050113Back Condition5299-5237NSC20050105Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 2 Rating: 10%Rating: 0%Derived from VA Rating Decision...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00996

    Original file (PD2010-00996.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending the ankle condition for separation rating. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review Mr. XXXX’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either his characterization of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00579

    Original file (PD2009-00579.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Other Conditions. In the matter of the bilateral plantar fasciitis condition, the Board unanimously recommends combining the condition and rating with the chronic bilateral sesamoiditis with left foot sesamoid shift condition as a combined unfitting condition, and the Board unanimously recommends that these conditions be coded as a separation rating of 10% for the left chronic plantar fasciitis/sesamoiditis with sesamoid shift condition coded 5284, and a separation rating of 20% for the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00584

    Original file (PD2009-00584.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB and VA exams both documented full range of motion, while the hand surgeon noted palmar flexion limited to 65 degrees. Right Foot Condition. The PEB coding for foot injury allows a moderate rating that more accurately reflects the degree of painful motion, painful use and painful scar comprising the CI’s foot condition.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00745

    Original file (PD2011-00745.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI was then medically separated with a 10% disability rating. Pain Left Foot Condition . All evidence considered, there is not a preponderance of the evidence in the CI’s favor supporting addition of the left ankle condition as an unfitting condition for separation rating.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01998

    Original file (PD-2013-01998.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pain medication required.” *VARD dated 25 July 2008 rated Posterior Tibial Tendonitis, right ankle 10% using code 5271 effective 24 March 2008 and Posterior Tibial Tendonitis, left ankle 10% using code 5271 effective 24 March 2008 and retained a 30% rating using code 5299-5276 for bilateral pes planus and plantar fasciitis (previously evaluated as posterior tibial tendon dysfunction bilaterally, plantar fasciitis bilaterally) ANALYSIS SUMMARY :The Board acknowledges the CI’s information...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 00537

    Original file (PD 2012 00537.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal PEBadjudicated “chronic pain, both heels, due to bone spurs and Achilles tendonitis”as unfitting, rated at 10%,citing criteria of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy.The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The PEB rated the bilateral Achilles tendonitis, heel spurs, and chronic heel painat 10% (Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities [VASRD] code 5003; degenerative arthritis) citing slight/frequent pain IAW USAPDA pain policy. The...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00711

    Original file (PD2009-00711.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Following treatment including two surgeries and two periods of limited duty, the CI did not respond adequately to perform within his rating and underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Left Foot Condition. I have reviewed the subject case pursuant to reference (a) and, for the reasons set forth in reference (b), approve the recommendation of the Physical Disability Board of Review Mr. XXXX’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either his characterization of separation or in...