RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

 

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY 

CASE NUMBER: PD1201174 SEPARATION DATE: 20020515 

BOARD DATE: 20130226 

 

 

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this 
covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC/E-4 (19K/ Tank Crewman), medically separated 
for chronic mechanical low back pain (LBP). On April 27, 2000 the CI was involved in a motor 
vehicle accident (MVA) while training in a tank. The chronic mechanical LBP condition could not 
be adequately rehabilitated with conservative treatment. The CI did not improve adequately 
with treatment to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty or 
satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a 
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The MEB forwarded no other conditions for Physical 
Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication. The PEB adjudicated the chronic mechanical LBP condition 
as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 
1332.39 and AR 635-40. The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated with a 10% 
disability rating. 

 

 

CI CONTENTION: “The rating was for chronic lower back pain and asthma but I never received 
an MRI while on active duty. Upon receiving an MRI at the VA Hospital in Charleston SC results 
show that I have a bulging disk between my L4 and L5 with signs of arthritis. I requested a MRI 
several times while on active duty but it never happened. The pain now wraps around to my 
stomach on some days and forces me to spend a bit of time on the toilet which is not always 
the best thing, like work or driving. The only help that the doctors off (sic) is motrin and I can’t 
live on pain pills that really don’t solve the problem.” 

 

 

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 asthma condition is 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: 

 

Service PEB – Dated 20020227 

VA (3 Mos. Post-Separation) – All Effective Date 20020516 

Condition 

Code 

Rating 

Condition 

Code 

Rating 

Exam 

Chronic Mechanical LBP 

5299-5295 

10% 

Low Back Condition 

5292 

10% 

20020807 

.No Additional MEB/PEB Entries. 

Asthma 

6602 

10% 

20020807 

 Not Service-Connected x 1 

20020807 

Combined: 10% 

Combined: 20% 



 

 

ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board acknowledges the sentiment expressed in the CI’s application 
regarding the significant impairment and worsening severity with which his service-incurred 
condition continues to burden him. It is a fact, however, that the Disability Evaluation System 


(DES) has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future 
severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation. This role and 
authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA). The Board’s 
authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40 resides in evaluating the fairness of DES rating decisions 
for disability at the time of separation. The Board also acknowledges the CI’s opinion that a 
service medical error missed the diagnosis of his disability (i.e. that an MRI was never ordered), 
with the implication that the disability rating should provide for remedy. It must be noted for 
the record that the Board has neither the jurisdiction nor authority to scrutinize or render 
opinions in reference to allegations regarding suspected improprieties or faulty medical care. 
The Board’s role is confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess 
the fairness of PEB disability rating as elaborated above. Redress in excess of the Board’s scope 
of recommendations must be addressed by the Army Board for Corrections of Military Records 
and/or the United States judiciary system. 

 

Chronic Mechanical Low Back Pain. The 2002 Veteran Administration Schedule for Rating 
Disabilities (VASRD) coding and rating standards for the spine, which were in effect at the time 
of permanent separation, were changed to the current §4.71a rating standards on 
26 September 2003, following the CI’s permanent disability disposition. The older ratings were 
based on a judgment as to whether the disability was mild, moderate or severe. The current 
standards are grounded in range-of-motion (ROM) measurements. IAW DoDI 6040.44, this 
Board must consider the appropriate rating for the CI’s back condition at separation based on 
the VASRD standards in effect at the time of separation. The CI injured his spine while standing 
in the loader hatch of a tank. He presented soon thereafter for non-radiating LBP that 
worsened with wear of his required equipment. X-rays were normal. Multi-modality treatment 
by physical therapy resulted in no permanent benefit. At the MEB exam in February 2002, 3 
months prior to separation, the CI reported constant, non-radiating lower back pain, without 
weakness or paresthesia in his lower extremities. He reported no bladder or bowel dysfunction 
and was taking no medication at that time. He described the intensity of his baseline pain as 4 
on a scale of 1-10; and his pain increased to 7 out 10 with bending, lifting 15-20 pounds, and 
with prolonged running. The examiner noted left paraspinal tenderness at the L3 level. The 
examiner reported “full range of motion with flexion” and “complaint of pain during range of 
motion.” The straight leg test was negative. Lower extremity strength and sensation were 
normal bilaterally. The DTRs were 2+ in the knees and ankles. At the VA Compensation and 
Pension (C&P) exam in August 2002, 3 months after separation, the CI described non-radiating 
pain in his mid to lower lumbar area. The CI reported stiffness without weakness or fatigability. 
He reported that his symptoms were alleviated by lying down and stretching several times a 
day. He did not wear a brace or use an assistive device for walking. The examination of the 
lumbar spine found no abnormality of curvature, spasm, or deformity. Gait was normal. The 
examiner noted no atrophy of the buttocks or lower extremities. The lower extremity strength 
and DTRs were reported to be symmetrical. The examiner stated that, “Back has full range of 
motion,” and noted “no real pain” with bilateral bending. An ROM assessment noted lumbar 
flexion to “touch his hands on the floor,” extension to 25 degrees and lateral flexion to 25 
degrees bilaterally. He described the motor and sensory exams as intact. An X-ray of the 
lumbosacral spine was reportedly normal. 

 

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The 
Board deliberated the respective coding approaches applied by the PEB and VA in rating the 
condition IAW 2003 VASRD. The PEB assigned a 10% rating for “characteristic pain on motion” 
under an analogous 5295 code (lumbosacral strain). The VA’s 10% rating was based on “slight” 
limitation of motion, code 5292 (lumbar limitation of motion). The Board considered the 
evidence and agreed that the condition was best represented by lumbosacral strain 
predominantly characterized by subjective pain with motion. The Board members agreed that 
there was no documentation of muscle spasm with extreme forward bending or loss of lateral 
spine motion, unilateral, in the standing position, to justify the next higher 20% rating. 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 chronic mechanical low back pain 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. As discussed above, PEB 
reliance on DoDI 1332.39 and AR 635-40 were operant in this case and the condition was 
adjudicated independently of those policies by the Board. In the matter of the chronic 
mechanical LBP condition and IAW 2003 VASRD, the Board unanimously recommends no 
change in the PEB adjudication. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of 
review for consideration. 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no recharacterization of 
the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows: 

 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

VASRD 
CODE 

RATING 

Chronic Mechanical Low Back Pain 

5299-5295 

10% 

COMBINED 

10% 



 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20120607, w/atchs 

Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record 

Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 

 

 

 

 

 

 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, DAF 

 Acting Director 

 Physical Disability Board of Review 

 


SFMR-RB 


 

 

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency 

(TAPD-ZB / xxxxxxxxxxx), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557 

 

SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation 
for xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, AR20130006156 (PD201201174) 

 

 

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: 

 

 

 

 

Encl xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 Deputy Assistant Secretary 

 (Army Review Boards)