Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00067
Original file (PD2012 00067.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:    CASE: PD1200067
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20130430
SEPARATION DATE: 20090224


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty PFC/E-3 (92F10/Petroleum Supply Specialist) medically separated for left shoulder arthropathy and migraine headaches. S he injured her shoulder in 2007 turning a trailer elevation crank. Later , i n 2008 , she was pinned between two vehicles and had a crush injury of her thorax . Although, s he had experienced occasional migraines before this accident, her headaches drastically increased afterwards . She could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of her Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satis fy physical fitness standards. She was issued a permanent P3 , U3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Left shoulder arthropathy and m igraines were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-5 01. The MEB also forwarded four other conditions to the PEB ; namely, anxiety, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) , intermittent low back pain (LBP) , and m enorrhagia with pelvic pain. The PEB adjudicated the left shoulder condition as unfitting, rated 1 0%, citing the criteria of the V eterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilit ies (VASRD). The PEB adjudicated the migraines as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the DoDI 1332.38 E4-12 definition of prostrating as meaning the s oldier must stop what s he is doing and seek medical attention. The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting . The CI appealed to the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) , requesting a rating greater than 0% for the migraine headaches . The USAPDA concurred with the PEB and the CI was separated with a combined 10% disability rating.


CI CONTENTION: “Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding menorrhagia with pelvic pain. Anxiety disorder with mild depression (service connected).”


SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e.(2). It is limited to those conditions determined by the PEB to be unfitting for continued military service and those conditions identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB when specifically requested by the CI. The ratings for the left shoulder and migraines conditions are addressed below. The requested a nxiety and dysfunctional uterine bleeding- m enorrhagia , which were determined to be not un fitting by the PEB, are also addressed below. 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 respective Service Board for Correction of Military Records.



RATING COMPARISON:

Service Admin IPEB – Dated 20081202
 VA - (5 & 19 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Left (Nondominant) Shoulder Arthropathy
 50995003 10% Left Shoulder Rotator Cuff Injury 5201 30% 20090727
Migraines
8100 0% Migraine Headache Associated w ith Traumatic Brain Injury w ith Mild Memory Loss 8100 30% * 20100915
Anxiety
 Not Unfitting Anxiety Disorder w / Mild D epression 9400 30% * 20100831
Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)
Not Unfitting Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD) 7346 0% * 20100915
Pelvic Pain with Menorrhagia
Not Unfitting Dysfunctional Uterine Bleeding 7699-7629 30% * 20100915
Intermittent Low Back Pain
Not Unfitting Back Pain 5237 10% * 20100915
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 2 20100915
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 80%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 20 100504 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).
* Ratings were originally deferred, and subsequent VARD 20110211 two years post separation rated all asterisked conditions as shown based on exams done approximately 19 months post separation.


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6040.44, resides in evaluating the fairness of Disability Evaluation System (DES) fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. The Board utilizes service and VA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations and DoDI 6040.44 defines a 12-month interval for special consideration of post-separation evidence. Post-separation evidence is probative only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the disability and fitness implications at the time of separation.

Left Shoulder Condition: There were goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) evaluations in evidence, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation; as summarized in the chart below.

Left Shoulder ROM
MEB ~ 8 Mo . Pre-Sep VA C&P ~ 5 Mo. Post- Sep
Flexion (180 )
 180 0-45
Abduction (180)
 180 (pain at 150) 0-30
Comments
 Measured after MVA; Tenderness to palpation over bicipital groove and anterior tubercular groove ; pain with internal rotation, flexion and abduction near the end of the range of motion ; positive Neer impingement test and cross arm test; negative drop arm test and lift off P ain with motion; no laxity, tende rness, swelling, effusion, ankylosis; normal strength, sensation, reflexes. The uninjured right shoulder had severely limited ROM; 75 deg flexion and 80 deg abduction
§4.71a Rating
 10% (5003) 30% (5201)

The earliest documentation in the service treatment records (STR) of a left shoulder problem is a radiology report of the left shoulder dated 7 September 2007 that was normal; the X -ray had been requested for a history of severe pain in the left anterior shoulder after an apparent anterior subluxation on the previous day . Examination by physical therapy in October noted left shoulder abduction limited to 160 degrees and flexion limited to 170 degrees , both by pain. Current pain level was 7 out of 10 with worst pain reported as 8 out of 10 and best at 3 out of 10. There was tenderness to palpation over the bicipital groove. The therapist also reported the CI had been seen by orthopedics and had been in a shoulder immobilizer for 2 weeks after a subluxation. A repeat examination in November 2007 recorded full ROM with pain reported as ranging from 0 out of 10 to 3 out of 10 . On 18 April 2008, her commander signed a Physical Disability Evaluation System ( PDES ) referral statement, stating that she was unable to perform the duties or her MOS . On the Report of Medical Examination (DD Form 2808) for the MEB, dated 6 May 2008, the examiner noted “left shoulder-tenderness to palpation (anterior aspect)” and “no limitation of movement.” However, pain was elicited with elevation, external rotation, and abduction at the end of the ROM . Also, both upper extremities had normal 5/5 strength and 2+ deep tendon reflexes (DTRs) . While awaiting MEB for her left shoulder, on 10 May 2008, she suffered multiple injuries when a parked car rolled and pinned her against another car. No shoulder injuries were noted, but she was admitted to the ICU, having suffered a fractured first rib and bilateral pneumothoraces , r equiring a bilateral chest thoracotomy .

The MEB narrative summa ry (NARSUM) 8 months prior to separation d ocuments constant pain in the anterior left shoulder, radiating into the left scapula, ever since the original injury in September 2007 , worse at the limits of flexion, abduction, and external rotation and n ot responding to conservative therapy , including subacromial injection, physical therapy including transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation ( TENS ) , pain management, and chiropractic care . The physical examination findings are noted in the chart above. The NARSUM notes a magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) of the left shoulder suggested a little bit of subacromial inflammation but was otherwise normal and did not document any labral tears or rotator cuff injury . The MEB diagnosis was left shoulder arthropathy. The examiner noted that serial Armed Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application ( AHLTA ) encounters with an orthopedist documented concern that complaints and examination findings differed from visit to visit and that this could indicate some type of secondary gain . The VA Compensation & Pension ( C&P ) examination 5 months after separation, noted pain in the left shoulder, difficulty reaching, lifting and carrying, and subjective weakness of le ft rotator cuff muscles ( supraspinatus, infraspinatus, teres minor, and subscapularis [ SITS ] ). The CI was not employed and she was attending college. The physical findings are noted in the chart above. Additionally, clinic visits for occipital nerve blocks to treat headaches, from August through November 2008 (prior to her separation), noted spasms of the upper trapezius muscles of both shoulders, but did not address left shoulder ROM. A later C&P mental disorders examination in Aug ust 2010 included p sychological testing that was consistent with “a pattern of over endorsement of problems that likely resulted in exaggerated a nd distorted symptom reporting. Such a result raises concerns of the objective accuracy of her self- report. ” This examination was completed 19 months after separation.

The MEB NARSUM and PEB state that the CI is right handed. The 2010 VARD noted that the STR show ed that she is r ight handed, but at the VA C&P, the CI stated that she is left handed. Physical therapy notes from 2007 document that she is left hand dominant.

invalid font number 31502 The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. invalid font number 31502 The PEB rated the condition analogous to 5003 and invalid font number 31502 rated invalid font number 31502 10% invalid font number 31502 based on painful motion invalid font number 31502 . The VA rated the condition as 5 invalid font number 31502 201 ( invalid font number 31502 a invalid font number 31502 rm, limitation of motion), invalid font number 31502 and assigned a 30% rating based on flexion and abduction invalid font number 31502 of the left shoulder limited to a point midway between side and shoulder level on the dominant side. There is a clear discrepancy between the limitations of motion documented on the NARSUM and C&P examinations. invalid font number 31502 The Board invalid font number 31502 carefully deliberated its probative value assignment to these conflicting evaluations, and carefully reviewed the service file for corroborating evidence in the 12-month period prior to separation. invalid font number 31502 While there is ample evidence documented painful motion prior to separation, there is no evidence invalid font number 31502 of limitation of left shoulder ROM to shoulder height or less prior to invalid font number 31502 or at invalid font number 31502 separation. invalid font number 31502 invalid font number 31502 The ROM values reported by the VA examiner, invalid font number 31502 5 invalid font number 31502 months after separation, are significantly worse than those reported by the MEB dated invalid font number 31502 8 invalid font number 31502 months invalid font number 31502 prior to invalid font number 31502 separation. invalid font number 31502 While outpatient treatment notes for visits that occurred after the C&P examination was completed do not include ROM measurements, they do not indicate any significant worsening invalid font number 31502 of the left shoulder condition. invalid font number 31502 There is no record of recurrent injury or other development in explanation of the more marked impairment reflected by the VA measurements. invalid font number 31502 The Board places greater probative value on the NARSUM invalid font number 31502 examination. invalid font number 31502 Although, it appears the PEB incorrectly stated the CI was right hand dominant, this does not materially affect the rating. invalid font number 31502 After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (r easonable doubt ) , the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the left shoulder condition.
Migraine headache condition: An initial n eurology a ddendum to the MEB NARSUM was completed in mid-August 2008 after the serious crush injury with bilateral pneumothoraces, a liver laceration, and a fractured left first rib on 10 May 2008 described above. T he CI had a brief loss of consciousness (2-5 minutes) and brief amnesia with confusion, seeing stars, and tinnitus at the time of injury. The CI reported daily moderate-to- severe headaches that were left temporal, stabbing in nature, and associated with nausea, photophobia, and episodic numbness or swelling on the left side of her face. The headaches were triggered by stress or anger, would last for hours, and were relieved with narcotics. She also reported a history of one to two headaches per month in her early twenties, prior to the accident. Neurologic examination s were normal and MRIs of her brain and cervical spine were normal in June 2008. The diagnosis was traumatic brain injury (TBI) without intracranial hemorrhage and refractory migraines with documented compliance with therapy. An update to the addendum at the end of August, noted some relief with Indocin, pain management injections, and chiropractic manipulations. Although Depakote had achieved therapeutic levels in June 2008 , it did not provide any relief and it was discontinued . A later update, completed in October 2008, noted refractory migraines with documented compliance with therapy, worse since the injury in May 2008 . The headaches occurred several hours each day and were associated with significant nausea, photophobia, and impaired concentration.

The Board reviewed the STRs to determine the frequency and severity of the CI’s headaches. The STRs note two small, 1 by 2 centimeter contusions in front of and behind left ear in early June 2008 and initiation of treatment or migraine headaches with Depakote and Midrin. At a visit to primary care in July 2008, the CI reported headaches occurring at least once a week. The CI reported stopping the medications prescribed by the neurologist. She had 50% relief of headache symptoms with a Toradol injection and she was prescribed Phenergan and F i oricet. Six days later, she was seen with a headache and depressed mental status that was thought to be a reaction to the Fioricet. She was given Vicodin instead for acute symptoms. A pain clinic evaluation on 12 August 2008 noted a headache nearly every day with varying severity. Treatment with occipital nerve blocks and trigger point injections was started. Later in August , she reported an occipital headache with mild dullness and she received injections a second time . A day lat er in the n eurology clinic , her pain was reported as 2 out of 10 and the neurologist noted her headaches were relieved with Indocin and injections. A w eek later, the CI had pain at 4 out of 10 and she reported she had no significant headaches since the last injections. The injections were repeated. At the next visit, 5 days later , the CI reported 2 out of 10 for pain and stated she had been pain free for 6 days. The injections were repeated. At a follow-up 7 weeks late r, the CI reported 4 out of 10 for pain and stated she had relief for 6 days after her last injections. It is not clear if there were visits or injections during the intervening seven weeks. Injections were repeated. The final follow-up visit documented in the record was a week later , and documented that the previous injections had resulted in relief for 6 days , with the first headache occurring the night before the visit. She reported no headache and 0 out of 10 for pain at this visit ; the injections were repeated. The plan w a s to follow-up in a week but no further clinic visit notes are available for review. With regular occipital nerve blocks and trigger point injections in addition to her medications, it appears the frequency of the CI’s headaches decreased from nearly every day to approximately once a week. The record does not contain information regarding the CI’s need to leave work or stop her activities when her headaches occurred. On the visits where the CI did report a current headache, she rated her pai n at levels ranging from 2 to 4 out of 10. At the C&P exam performed 5 months after separation, the CI reported being incapacitated for 1 to 3 days with two migraines per month. She was not taking Imitre x because she was breast feeding an infant at the time. The CI reported she was essentially incapacitated for 24 to 72 hours during an acute migraine and that her headaches prevented shopping, exercise, sports, recreation, traveling, and driving and severely affected f eeding, toileting and grooming.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the headaches using 8100 and rated 0% for prostrating headaches occurring less than one per every 2 months. The PEB cited the DoDI 1332.38 definition of prostrating as meaning the soldier must stop what she is doing and seek medical attention. Using the same code, the VA assigned a 30% based on prostrating headaches that occurred about once every 2 weeks. The VA determined that during a migraine attack, the CI was unable to perform usual daily activities and had to go to a dark room and sleep until the symptoms resolved. The standard VA definition of prostrating does not require seeking medical attention but does require the affected individual must stop what they are doing and take medications or rest. While the frequency of headaches reported at the VA examination is not incompatible with the documented frequency of headaches in the STR, the STR contains no evidence supporting or refuting the CI having to stop her activities to seek care or rest when a headache occurred. The STR does contain pain scale ratings during headaches that range from 2 to 4 out of 10. These pain scale ratings do not support a determination of these headaches as prostrating. However, it is clear that the CI did not seek medical care every time she had a headache. Therefore, it is reasonable to determine that of the weekly headaches the CI had in the several months prior to separation, one out of every eight headaches was just as likely as not to meet the VA definition of prostrating. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 Reasonable doubt, the Board recommends a separation rating of 10% for the migraine condition.

Contended PEB Conditions. The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB were anxiety and pelvic pain with menorrhagia. The Board’s first charge with respect to these conditions is an assessment of the appropriateness of the PEB’s fitness adjudications. The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the VASRD §4.3 Reasonable doubt standard used for its rating recommendations, but remains adherent to the DoDI 6040.44 “fair and equitable” standard. Neither of these conditions were profiled, neither were implicated in the commander’s statement and neither were judged to fail retention standards. There was no indication from the record that either condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance.

Anxiety: STRs in September, 2006, note that the CI was referred to mental health during basic training for depression, insomnia and loss of pleasure. There are no clinic notes available; however, the STR problem list includes an entry during this period for adjustment disorder with depressed mood. STRs do note that the CI had been referred to mental health but did not follow up. The CI stated on 18 September 2006 that she was homesick and had an appointment with the chaplain. After her motor vehicle accident (MVA) in May 2008, she was prescribed clonazepam for anxiety, and on 3 July 2008, experienced a panic attack when involved in a minor MVA (“fender bender”) in a parking lot on base. A mental health NARSUM to the MEB on 5 August 2008 notes that anxiety symptoms secondary to her MVA had improved. She noted that she had stopped taking the clonazepam. The CI stated that on this occasion that she was “happy” and denied that psychiatric symptoms interfere with her “ability to perform her duties or…with her social relationships.” This summary concluded that, although she “initially met criteria for acute stress disorder” secondary to her accident, she “did not progress to post traumatic stress disorder.” The summary noted that she did “not meet criteria for an anxiety disorder” and that she met retention criteria. There was no suicidal ideation, delusional or hallucinatory symptoms, speech disturbance, cognitive impairment or other abnormalities. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of evidence, the Board’s consensus is that there is insufficient evidence to challenge the PEB’s fitness conclusion, and there were no clinical features or specific functional limitations which would render the anxiety condition unfitting. Therefore, no service disability rating for this condition can be recommended.

Pelvic Pain with Menorrhagia: Having entered basic training on 31 May 2006, on 18 August 2006, the CI first noted pelvic pain “for three months,” noting a history of heavy menstrual bleeding and pelvic pain. On 28 August 2006, she reported a family history of endometriosis. She added that a “doctor at home told her she probably had endometriosis.” She stated that she had not reported this problem to her recruiter. She was diagnosed with an ovarian cyst, and, when symptoms worsened in September 2006, she was diagnosed in the emergency department (ED) with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). On 9 June 2007, she underwent a C-section, and on 30 April 2008, returned to the ED for cramping pelvic pain and vaginal bleeding. There was no documentation that this condition resulted in any permanent work restrictions. The MEB NARSUM noted that this condition was “mitigated with medications” and it met retention standards. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of evidence, the Board’s consensus is that there is insufficient evidence to challenge the PEB’s fitness conclusion, and there were no clinical features or specific functional limitations which would render the pelvic pain with menorrhagia condition unfitting. Therefore, no disability rating for this condition can be recommended.


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. In the matter of the left shoulder condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. Although the CI was left hand dominant, this did not affect the disability rating. In the matter of the migraine condition, the Board unanimously recommends a separation rating of 10%, coded 8100 IAW VASRD §4.124a. In the matter of the contended anxiety and pelvic pain with menorrhagia 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.


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
 VASRD CODE RATING
Left (Nondominant) Shoulder Condition
 5099 - 5003 10%
Migraines
8100 1 0%
COMBINED
 20%


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20111213, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record





         Physical Disability Board of Review


 SFMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(TAPD-ZB),


SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation
for AR20130010842 (PD201200067)
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 20% 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:




Encl                                                 
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01533

    Original file (PD-2013-01533.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Informal PEB adjudicated “TBI with residual neck pain and headaches;” “low back pain (LBP);” and “left knee pain with degenerative joint disease (DJD),” as unfitting, rated at 10%, 10%, and 0% respectively, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The Board could not find evidence in the commander’s statement or elsewhere in the treatment record that documented any significant interference of the neck pain condition with the performance of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01011

    Original file (PD2012 01011.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated “posttraumatic headaches” as unfitting, rated 10%, citing criteria of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI was evaluated by a civilian neurologist who noted that neurosurgery was not indicated for the Arnold-Chiari defect and further opined that the mild posttraumatic headaches were not unusual following accidents.The MEB narrative summary exam completed approximately 9 monthsprior to separation documented chronic daily posttraumatic...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 02110

    Original file (PD2013 02110.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His also complained of sleep issues,which were considered to meet retention standards. Surgery was not indicated.The MEB separation examination on 5 May 2009 (6 months prior to separation) noted no back tenderness or muscle spasm. The VA examination meanwhile showed completely normal ROM and no additional limitation after repetition.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-03429

    Original file (PD-2014-03429.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the shoulder condition as unfitting, rated 10%, citing application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The IPEB also determined there was compelling evidence to support a finding that the seizure condition existed prior to service (EPTS) and was not permanently aggravated beyond natural progression by military service. The Board noted the CI experienced another seizure in April 2009, 3 months after separation and the ER physician indicated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01246

    Original file (PD2013 01246.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated “right, dominant, shoulder pain… ,” “right hip pain,” and “bilateral heel pain and right ankle pain” as unfitting, rated 10%, 0% and 0% (respectively), citing criteria of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Right Shoulder Pain…5099-500310%Right Shoulder Arthritis5010-520110%20091125Right Hip Pain…5099-50030%Right Hip Bursitis5024-525210%Bilateral Heel Pain and Right Ankle Pain…52840%Stress Fracture,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02696

    Original file (PD-2013-02696.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 theVASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. 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. The commander’s statement dated 30 October 2007,7 months before...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD 2013 00937

    Original file (PD 2013 00937.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation; and, to review those fitness determinations within its scope (as elaborated above) consistent with performance-based criteria in evidence at separation. Neck Pain Condition . The single voter for dissent did not elect to submit a...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01789

    Original file (PD-2013-01789.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB examiner described the CI’s current functional status as “required to miss fairly frequent work duties due to the migraine headaches.”The MEB examiner provided a pain rating of slight/intermittent.The commander’s statement noted that “at various times” the CI had to “leave work due to migraines or abdominal pains that incapacitates her to work.”The VA C&P exam on 25 February 2005, performed 2 monthsafter separation, did not address the migraine condition, but listed 12 conditions...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD 2012 01082

    Original file (PD 2012 01082.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s role is confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, based on severity at the time of separation. In the matter of the chronic LBP condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 20%, coded 5243, IAW VASRD §4.71a that was in effect at the time of separation. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00715

    Original file (PD 2014 00715.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Low Back Pain with Radiculopathy523710%Mild Central Bulge L3-4524310%20040315Other x6 (Not in Scope)Other x7 (Not in Scope)20040315 Combined: 10%Combined: 40%*Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20040518 (most proximate to date of separation) invalid font number 31502 ANALYSIS SUMMARY : LBP with Radiculopathy Condition . RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI's...