RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

BRANCH OF SERVICE:   ARMY  
SEPARATION DATE:  20060126 

 
NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                                            
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200297    
BOARD DATE:  20121102    
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered individual (CI) was a 1LT/O-2 (00E, Student Officer) medically separated for chronic low 
back pain (LBP).  She was treated, but did not respond adequately to fully perform her military 
duties or meet physical fitness standards.  She was issued a permanent profile and a Medical 
Evaluation Board (MEB) was initiated.  The MEB found the chronic LBP medically unacceptable, 
and referred her to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  No other conditions were listed on the 
DA Form 3947.  The PEB found the chronic LBP condition unfitting, and rated it 10% IAW the 
Veterans’  Administration  Schedule  for  Rating  Disabilities  (VASRD).    The  CI  accepted  the  PEB 
findings, and was medically separated with a 10% disability rating.   
 
 
CI CONTENTION:  “I was given a rating of 10% and then separated from the Army.  I find it odd 
that I was deemed physically unfit for duty but received such a low rating. I believe that if I was 
physically  unfit  for  duty,  my  disability  rating  should  be  higher  than  10  or  20%.  After  being 
discharged  I  went  to  the  VA  to  be  evaluated  and  received  an  initial  disability  rating  of  10%. 
Since then I have been reevaluated and I now have a disability rating of 30%.”  
 
 
SCOPE  OF  REVIEW:    The  Board’s  scope  of  review  as  defined  in  the  Department  of  Defense 
Instruction (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 unfitting chronic back pain condition meets the criteria prescribed in DoDI 6040.44 
for  Board  purview,  and  is  accordingly  addressed  below.    No  other  condition  is  within  the 
Board’s purview.  Any condition outside the Board’s defined scope of review may be eligible for 
future consideration by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records.    
 
 
RATING COMPARISON:   
 

Army PEB – dated 20051006 

VA (4.5 mos. Post-Separation) – All Effective 20060127 

*The VA rating for Disk Disease was later increased, by a subsequent VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20091221 
 
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:   
 
Back  Pain  Condition.    In  September  2004,  2  months  after  starting  active  duty,  the  CI  began 
having pain in her entire spine (neck, mid-back, and lower back).  There was no history of any 
specific  injury  or  trauma  to  the  spine.    From  September  2004  to  December  2004,  the  pain 
became  progressively  worse.    When  she  began  flight  training,  she  noticed  that  sitting  in  a 
helicopter  significantly  increased  her  pain.    Magnetic  resonance  imaging  (MRI)  performed  in 
May 2005 showed the cervical and thoracic spine to be essentially normal.  The lumbar spine 

Condition 
Chronic Back Pain 

Code 

5299-5237 

Rating 
10% 

Condition 
Disk Disease, Lumbar 

↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓ 

Combined:  10% 

Code 
5237 

Rating 
10%* 

Exam 

20060612 
20060612 

0% X 1 
Combined:  10%* 

showed disc bulges (L3-L4 & L4-L5), some facet hypertrophy, and mild canal stenosis.  She was 
seen by a neurosurgeon who recommended against surgery or epidural injections.  Since the 
pain did not resolve with treatment, an MEB was initiated.  Her MEB clinical evaluation was at 
Fort Rucker AL, on 16 September 2005.  At that time, the neck pain had cleared and was only 
minimally  uncomfortable.    The  thoracic  (mid-back)  pain  had  also  improved.    However,  she 
continued to have significant low back pain (LBP).  On exam, her gait and spinal curvature were 
normal.  There was no muscle spasm noted.  She did have some tenderness to palpation (TTP).  
Straight  leg  raise  (SLR)  and  neurological  exam  were  normal.    Range-of-motion  (ROM)  was 
measured and is summarized in the chart below. 
 
On 12 June 2006, 19 weeks after separation, the CI had a VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) 
exam.  At that time, she complained of pain, but was in no acute distress.  Height was 65 inches, 
weight 128 pounds, BMI 21.  She had normal posture and gait.  Examination of the back showed 
no  evidence  of  spasm,  weakness,  or  tenderness.    Thoracolumbar  ROM  was  full,  with  mild 
discomfort during flexion and extension.  Neurological exam was normal.  In the CI’s treatment 
record, two relevant ROM evaluations were noted, and are summarized below.   
 

MEB – 19 weeks Pre-Sep 

VA C&P – 19 weeks Post-Sep 

(20050916) 

(20060612) 

Thoracolumbar ROM 
Flexion (90⁰ is normal) 

Combined (240⁰ is normal) 

Comment 

§4.71a Rating 

110⁰ 
230⁰ 

10% 

Painful ROM 

Mild discomfort with ROM 

90⁰ 
240⁰ 

10%* 

*10% based on VASRD §4.59 (Painful motion) 

 
The Board carefully reviewed all evidentiary information available.  After consideration of the 
two  back  examinations  noted  above,  it  was  determined  that  both  exams  carried  probative 
value.    Both  examinations  were  conducted  in  a  thorough  manner,  and  were  performed  19 
weeks away from her date of separation.  Based on the September 2005 MEB exam, and IAW 
the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) §4.71a, a disability rating of 10% is warranted 
due  to  combined  thoracolumbar  ROM  greater  than  120  degrees  but  not  greater  than  235 
degrees.  Her combined thoracolumbar ROM was 230 degrees, because normal ROM for flexion 
(90 degrees) is the maximum that can be used for calculation of combined ROM.  Based on the 
June  2006  VA  exam,  and  IAW  VASRD  §4.59,  a  disability  rating  of  10%  is  warranted  due  to 
painful  motion  of  the  thoracolumbar  spine.    The  evidence  in  the  treatment  record  does  not 
show sufficient justification for a rating greater than 10%.  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 
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.    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 chronic back pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the 
Board  unanimously  recommends  no  change  in  the  PEB  adjudication.  There  were  no  other 
conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.   
 
 
 

 

   2                                                           PD1200297 
 

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

VASRD CODE  RATING 
5299-5237 
COMBINED 

10% 
10% 

           XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
           President 
           Physical Disability Board of Review 

Chronic Back Pain 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20120309, w/atchs 
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record 
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

   3                                                           PD1200297 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 
 

SFMR-RB 
 
 
 
 
MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency  
(TAPD-ZB /  ), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA  22202-3557 
 
SUBJECT:  Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20120021209 (PD201200297) 
 
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 
 
 
 
CF:  
(  ) DoD PDBR 
(  ) DVA 
 
 

     XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
     Deputy Assistant Secretary 
         (Army Review Boards) 

 
 
 

   4                                                           PD1200297