RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

BRANCH OF SERVICE:  NAVY 
SEPARATION DATE:  20090103 

 
NAME:  XX 
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200867 
BOARD DATE:  20130212 
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered  individual  (CI)  was  an  active  duty  PR2/E-5  (7352/Aircrew  Survival  Equipment  man) 
medically  separated  for  cervical,  thoracic  and  lumbar  spine pain.    The  CI  received  numerous 
orthopedic  injuries  from  multiple  parachute  jumps  due  to  his  duty  as  a  US  Navy  parachute 
tester.    In  January  2008,  he  was  found  “fit”  after  a  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (PEB)  was 
convened  to  consider  his  left  shoulder  and  right  knee  conditions.    In  spite  of  chronic  pain 
therapy,  the  CI’s  orthopedic  conditions  could  not  be  adequately  rehabilitated  to  meet  the 
physical requirements of his rating or satisfy physical fitness standards.  In June 2008, another 
Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) was held to evaluate the CI’s numerous orthopedic conditions 
and again he was found “fit for full duty” with seven conditions identified and forwarded for 
PEB adjudication.  The PEB also adjudicated the CI fit for duty in September 2008.  The CI then 
requested  a  PEB  reconsideration  citing  that  the  PEB  did  not  have  medical  information 
concerning his spinal condition due to an incomplete PEB  package.  The PEB reconsideration 
resulted in the adjudication of cervical, thoracic, lumbar spine pain condition as unfitting and 
the  six  additional  conditions,  identified  in  the  rating  comparison  chart  below,  identified  as 
Category III conditions, conditions that are not separately unfitting and do not contribute to the 
unfitting condition.  The reconsidered PEB adjudication for the cervical, thoracic, lumbar spine 
pain  condition  was  coded  5243  using  the  Veterans  Affairs  Schedule  for  Rating  Disabilities 
(VASRD) and rated at 20%.  The CI made no further appeals, and he was medically separated 
with a 20% disability rating. 
 
 
CI CONTENTION:  “I would like the Physical Disability Board of Review to review my medical 
separation to ensure it was fair, consistent and accurate with the Veterans Affairs schedule for 
Rating Disabilities.” 
 
 
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 the unfitting cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine pain condition will be reviewed.  The six 
additional  Category  III  conditions  requested for consideration  meet  the criteria prescribed  in 
DoDI  6040.44  for  Board  purview,  and  are  accordingly  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 Board for Correction of Naval Records. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

STR 

Joint, 

/ 

RATING COMPARISON: 
 

Cat III 

Cat III 

Cat III 
Cat III 

Cat III 

Cat III 

Ankle 

Thoracic, 

5243 

20% 

5003 

5003 

Code 

Rating 

0%* 

0%* 
10% 
10% 
10% 
10% 
10% 

5010 
5257 
5271 
5271 

VA (3.5 Mos. Pre-Separation) – All Effective Date 20090104 
Condition 
Thoracic 
Thoracolumbar Strain 
Spondylosis Cervical Spine 
Degenerative Arthritis - Right Hip Joint 

Code 
5242 
5242 
5010-5252 

Lumbar  DJD; 

Spondylosis; 

Rating 
10% 
10% 
10% 

Exam 
20080917  
20080917  
20080917  

STR 
20080917  
20080917  
20080917  
20080917  
20080917  
20080917  

Degenerative Arthritis Right Elbow 
1st  Metacarpal 
Osteoarthritis 
Bilateral Hands 
Left Shoulder Impingement / Residual Scar  5003-5024 
Degenerative  Arthritis  Right  Knee 
Residual Scar 
Instability, Right Knee 
Chronic Left Ankle Strain 
Chronic Right Ankle Strain 
0% x1 / Not Service-Connected x2 
Combined:  60% with Bilateral factors 

Service  IPEB  Reconsideration  –  Dated 
20081029 
Condition 
Cervical 
Lumbar Spine Pain 
Greater  Trochanteric 
Bursitis 
Right  Elbow  Pain  and 
Limitations of Motion 
Bilateral  Hand  Pain 
and Stiffness 
Left Shoulder Pain  
Osteoarthritis, 
Bilateral Knees  
Bilateral 
Instability 
↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓ 
Combined:  20% 
*Per VARD dated 20100701 additional conditions were added effective 20100218 with no change to combined rating 
 
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  The Board acknowledges the CI’s contention that suggests ratings should 
have been conferred for other conditions documented at the time of separation.  The Board 
wishes to clarify that it is subject to the same laws for service disability entitlements as those 
under which the Disability Evaluation System (DES) operates.  While the DES considers all of the 
member's medical conditions, compensation can only be offered for those medical conditions 
that cut short a member’s career, and then only to the degree of severity present at the time of 
final disposition.  However the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set 
of  laws  (Title  38,  United  States  Code),  is  empowered  to  compensate  all  service-connected 
conditions  and  to  periodically  reevaluate  said  conditions  for  the  purpose  of  adjusting  the 
Veteran’s disability rating should the degree of impairment vary over time. 
 
The reconsideration PEB combined cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine pain as a single unfitting 
condition.    The  Board  must  apply  separate  codes  and  ratings  in  its  recommendations  if 
compensable ratings for each condition are achieved IAW VASRD §4.71a.  If the Board judges 
that  two  or  more  separate  ratings  are  warranted  in  such  cases, however,  it  must  satisfy the 
requirement that each ‘unbundled’ condition can be reasonably justified as unfitting in and of 
itself.  Not uncommonly, this approach by the PEB reflects its judgment that the constellation of 
conditions was unfitting, and that there was no need for separate fitness adjudications, not a 
judgment that each condition was independently unfitting.  Thus, the Board must exercise the 
prerogative of separate fitness recommendations in this circumstance, with the caveat that its 
recommendations may not produce a lower combined rating than that of the PEB. 
 
Cervical Spine Pain Condition.  The combined cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine pain condition 
will  be  considered  by  the  Board  as  two  separate  entities  for  fitness  determination  and 
subsequent coding and rating purposes.  This is based on note six of the General Rating Formula 
for  Diseases  and  Injuries  of  the  Spine  contained  in  VASRD  §4.71a,  the  Schedule  of  ratings-
musculoskeletal system.  Note six states, “Separately evaluate disability of the thoracolumbar 
and  cervical  spine  segments,  except  when  there  is  unfavorable  ankylosis  of  both  segments, 
which will be rated as a single disability.”  There was no unfavorable ankylosis of either spinal 
segment therefore, they will be separately evaluated for disability ratings.  Independent fitness 
determinations must be accomplished prior to coding and rating recommendations for each of 
the unbundled conditions.  The Board first considered if the cervical spine pain, having been de-
coupled  from  the  combined  PEB  adjudication,  was  independently  unfitting.    The  service 

2                                                           PD1200867 

treatment record (STR) document the CI’s complaint of neck pain over an 8 year period prior to 
separation.  Although there were no limited duty (LIMDU) chits or specific mention of neck pain 
in the commander’s statement, the duration of the pain along with his continued exposure to 
repetitive  cervical  trauma,  it  is  reasonably  justified  that  the  CI  be  found  unfit  for  continued 
military  duty  in  his  rating  as  a  parachute tester  due  to  his  cervical  spine  pain.    All  members 
agreed  that  the  cervical  spine  pain,  as  an  isolated  condition,  would  have  rendered  the  CI 
incapable  of  continued  service  within  his  Rating,  and  accordingly  merits  a  separate  service 
rating. 
 
There  was  one  goniometric 
in  evidence,  with 
documentation of additional ratable criteria, which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating 
recommendation; as summarized in the chart below. 
 

(ROM)  evaluation 

range-of-motion 

VA C&P 3.5 Mos. Pre-Sep 
45° 
45° 
45° 
35° 
75° 
55° 
300° 
Normal  Gait  and  posture;  No  radiating  pain  on 
movement; Pos. muscle spasm of left paracervical 
musculature;  Pos.  tenderness  of  cervical  spine; 
No  ankylosis  of  cervical  spine;  Joint  function  is 
additionally  limited  by  10°  in  left  rotation  after 
repetitive  use  due  to  pain,  fatigue  and  lack  of 
endurance  
10%* 

Cervical ROM 
Flex (45⁰ Normal) 
Ext (0-45) 
R Lat Flex (0-45) 
L Lat Flex (0-45) 
R Rotation (0-80) 
L Rotation (0-80) 
COMBINED (340⁰) 

MEB 5.5 Mos. Pre-Sep 
45° 
- 
- 
75° 
- 

Comment 

§4.71a Rating 

None 

10%* 

*Adequate evidence of painful motion IAW VASRD §4.59 
 
The  narrative  summary  (NARSUM)  prepared  5  months  prior  to  separation  noted  nothing 
related  to  the  CI’s  cervical  spine  pain.    The  NARSUM  was  prepared  specifically  for  the  PEB’s 
consideration  of  the  six  conditions  ultimately  adjudicated  as  Category  III  conditions,  not 
separately  unfitting  and  not  contributing  to  the  unfitting  condition.    At  the  MEB  exam 
accomplished  5  months  prior  to  separation,  the  CI  reported  cervical  radiculopathy  with  C6 
denervation on electromyogram testing.  Multi-level degenerative changes affecting all three 
levels  of  the  spine  was  documented  on  magnetic  resonance  imaging  with  neuroforaminal 
narrowing,  bulging  discs  and  annular  tear.    Recurrent  and  extremely  painful  back  and  neck 
issues  were  diagnosed  with  arthritis  in  back  and  neck  due  to  compression  from  parachute 
landing falls.  He also noted having bone spurs on C5-6 pushing on the spinal cord and he was 
prescribed Celebrex to reduce the swelling in the spinal column.  He experienced numbness and 
tingling in hands, arms, lower back, legs and feet before turning into a partial paralysis in the 
same  areas  lasting  30  minutes  or  less.    These  episodes  started  in  2003,  occurred  after  hard 
landings and had persisted until 2007.  He had not had an episode after starting Celebrex.  He 
had  multiple  whiplash  injuries  from  parachuting.    The  MEB  physical  exam  findings  are 
summarized in the cervical ROM chart above. 
 
At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed 3 months prior to separation, the 
CI  reported  being  diagnosed  with  recurrent  whiplash,  spondylosis  C5  and  C6.    The  condition 
existed since 2003 and was due to whiplash injuries related to parachuting.  He reported the 
following  symptom  from  the  spine  condition:  stiffness.    He  indicated  he  experienced  semi-
paralysis  for  up  to  45  minutes  after  each  episode  due  to  the  spine  condition.    He  had  no 
numbness,  loss  of  bladder  or  bowel  control.    He  reported  constant  pain  in  the  neck  that 
traveled to the left shoulder.  He described the pain as aching, sharp and cramping with a level 
of 6 out of 10.   The pain was elicited by physical activity, stress and computer work.  It was 

3                                                           PD1200867 

relieved by rest, Tramadol, Celebrex and by massage therapy.  During painful episodes, he could 
function  with  medication  use.    The  treatment  was  Tramadol,  taken  as  needed  with  some 
response and no side effects.  He stated his condition had not resulted in any incapacitation.  
From  the  above  condition,  the  functional  impairment  was  impaired  pushing,  pulling,  heavy 
lifting and carrying.  The pertinent physical exam findings are summarized in the cervical ROM 
chart above. 
 
The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The 
reconsideration PEB adjudicated the CI’s back pain as one combined condition, applied VASRD 
coded 5243, intervertebral disc syndrome based on incapacitating episodes, and rated it 20% 
for incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 2 weeks but less than 4 weeks 
during  the  past  12  months.    The  VA  applied  VASRD  code  5242,  degenerative  arthritis  of the 
spine,  and  rated  it  10%  based  on  limitation  of  joint  function  on  repetitive  use  due  to  pain, 
fatigue and lack of endurance.  The NARSUM did not address the cervical spine condition and 
the  MEB  exam  is  inadequate  for  rating  purposes.    The  C&P  exam  is  the  most  probative 
document for rating purposes; it was accomplished most proximate to the date of separation 
and provides the most detailed information.  Significant historical information contained in the 
C&P exam document includes the statement that the CI “stated his condition had not resulted 
in any incapacitation.”  That language specifically relates to the PEB’s use of VASRD code 5243 
that utilizes “incapacitating episodes” as the bases for its rating.  The C&P exam also notes that 
the  CI  experienced  45  minute  periods  of  “semi-paralysis”  that  could  be  considered 
incapacitating, however, these episodes had not occurred within 12 months of separation.  The 
lack of incapacitating episodes within 12 months of separation calls into question the PEB’s use 
of the 5243 code.  There is substantial evidence that the CI had significant degenerative arthritis 
of  the  cervical  spine  that  justifies  application  of  VASRD  code  5242.    That  code  refers  to  the 
General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine to arrive at a rating level based on 
ROM measurements.  The C&P exam documents non-compensable ROM measurements with 
adequate  evidence  of  painful  motion.    Rating  policy  §4.59,  painful  motion,  states  that  joints 
with painful motion are “entitled to at least the minimum compensable rating for the joint.”  In 
this case, the minimum rating is 10% IAW the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries 
of  the  Spine. 
  An  alternative  coding  and  rating  option  for  non-compensable  ROM 
measurements limited by pain is the application of VASRD code 5003, which also calls for a 10% 
rating in such cases.  There was no ratable radicular component to the CI’s cervical pain.  After 
due  deliberation,  considering  all  of  the  evidence  and  mindful  of  VASRD  §4.3  (Resolution  of 
reasonable  doubt),  the  Board  recommends  a  disability  rating  of  10%  for  the  degenerative 
arthritis of the cervical spine condition. 
 
 
Thoracolumbar  Spine  Pain  Condition.    As  stated  above,  the  combined  cervical,  thoracic  and 
lumbar spine pain condition will be considered by the Board as two separate entities for fitness 
determination  and  subsequent  coding  and 
fitness 
determinations must be accomplished prior to coding and rating recommendations for each of 
the unbundled conditions.  The Board first considered if the thoracolumbar spine pain, having 
been de-coupled from the combined PEB adjudication, was independently unfitting.  The STRs 
document the CI’s complaint of back pain over an 8 year period prior to separation.  Although 
there  were  no  LIMDU  chits  or  specific  mention  of  low  back  pain  (LBP)  in  the  commander’s 
statement, the duration of the pain along with his continued exposure to repetitive trauma, it is 
reasonably  justified  that  the  CI  be  found  unfit  for  continued  military  duty  due  to  his 
thoracolumbar spine pain.  It is also noted that the reconsideration PEB specifically requested 
ROM measurements of the CI’s thoracolumbar spine for rating purposes, directly signaling their 
adjudication that the thoracolumbar spine was independently unfitting.  All members agreed 
that  the  thoracolumbar  spine  pain,  as  an  isolated  condition,  would  have  rendered  the  CI 
incapable of continued service within his rating, and accordingly merits a separate rating. 

rating  purposes. 

 

Independent 

4                                                           PD1200867 

Thoracolumbar ROM  MEB 5.5 Mos. Pre-Sep 
Flexion (90⁰ Normal) 
Ext (0-30) 
R Lat Flex (0-30) 
L Lat Flex 0-30) 
R Rotation (0-30) 
L Rotation (0-30) 
Combined (240⁰) 

Lumbar  spine 
Range of Motion 

-  Full 

Comment 

Tenderness 

to 
Pos. 
palpation 
T2, 
medial/inferior  border 
of  both  scapula  and 
paraspinals  at  T10-12 
bilaterally; 
Marked  crepitence  and 
lumbar 
popping 
spine 
all 
movements 

of 
with 

VA C&P  3.5 Mos. Pre-Sep 
90° 
25° 
30° 
30° 
30° 
30° 
235° 
Normal  Gait;  No  radiating  pain  on 
movement  or  muscle  spasm;  Pos. 
tenderness  of  thoracolumbar  spine; 
Neg. straight leg raise on right and left; 
No ankylosis of the lumbar spine; joint 
function  is  additionally  limited  by  10° 
in 
after 
repetitive use due to  pain, fatigue and 
lack  of  endurance;  Normal  head 
position with symmetry in appearance 
and  motion;  normal  spinal  curvature; 
No 
Intervertebral  Disc 
Syndrome 
and 
permanent nerve root involvement 
10%* 

and  extension 

signs  of 

chronic 

flexion 

with 

reconsideration 

for 

ROMs 
IPEB 3 Mo. Pre-Sep 
60° 
10° 
10° 
10° 
20° 
20° 
130° 

Positive painful motion 

There were two goniometric 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. 
 

 

20% 

§4.71a Rating 
*Adequate evidence of painful motion IAW VASRD §4.59 
 
The  narrative  summary  (NARSUM)  prepared  5  months  prior  to  separation  noted  nothing 
related to the CI’s thoracolumbar spine pain.  The NARSUM was prepared specifically for the 
PEB’s consideration of the six conditions ultimately adjudicated as Category III conditions, not 
separately  unfitting  and  not  contributing  to  the  unfitting  condition.    At  the  MEB  exam 
accomplished 5 months prior to separation, the CI reported the same history documented in 
the cervical spine pain condition above.  The pertinent physical exam findings are summarized 
in the thoracolumbar ROM chart above. 
 
At the C&P exam performed 3 months prior to separation, the CI reported being diagnosed with 
recurrent thoracolumbar strain since 2004.  The history was similar to that noted above with 
the following significant additions.  The CI reported constant pain in the mid and lower back 
that traveled to his right hip and bilateral lower extremities.  The pain was aching sharp, sticking 
and cramping.  From 1 to 10 (10 being the worst pain) the pain level was at 6.  He stated his 
condition  had  not  resulted  in  any  incapacitation.    From  the  above  condition,  the  functional 
impairment  was  limitation  in  prolonged  sitting,  standing,  walking,  bending  and  heavy  lifting.  
The pertinent physical exam findings are summarized it the chart above. 
 
The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The 
reconsideration PEB adjudicated the CI’s back pain as one combined condition, applied VASRD 
coded 5243, intervertebral disc syndrome based on incapacitating episodes, and rated it 20% 
for incapacitating episodes having a total duration of at least 2 weeks but less than 4 weeks 
during the past 12 months.  The VA adjudicated the thoracic spondylosis, lumbar degenerative 
joint disease (DJD) and thoracolumbar strain applying VASRD code 5242, degenerative arthritis 
of the spine, and rated it 10% based on limitation of joint function on repetitive use due to pain, 
fatigue  and  lack  of  endurance.    The  NARSUM  did  not  address  the  thoracolumbar  spine 
condition  and  the  MEB  exam  is  inadequate  for  rating  purposes.    The  reconsideration  PEB 
examination  contained  adequate  ROM  measurements  for  rating  the  thoracolumbar  spine, 

5                                                           PD1200867 

documented  the  presence  of  painful  motion  and  it  was  performed  3  months  prior  to 
separation.    This  exam,  accomplished  by  a  physical  therapy  technician,  did  not  contain  any 
additional  comments  or  details  concerning  the  thoracolumbar  spine.    The  STRs  do  not 
document  any  reasonable  explanation  for  the  significant  difference  in  ROM  measurements 
between the PEB utilized exam and the C&P exam performed only 3 weeks apart.  Significant 
historical information contained in the C&P exam includes the statement that the CI “stated his 
condition  had  not  resulted  in  any  incapacitation.”    That  language  specifically  relates  to  the 
PEB’s use of VASRD code 5243 that utilizes “incapacitating episodes” as the bases for its rating.  
The  C&P  exam  also  notes  that  the  CI  experienced  45minute  periods  of  “semi-paralysis”  that 
could  be  considered  incapacitating,  however,  these  episodes  had  not  occurred  within  12 
months of separation.  The lack of incapacitating episodes within 12 months of separation calls 
into  question  the  PEB’s  use  of  the  5243  code.    After  significant  Board  deliberation,  the  C&P 
exam  was  determined  to  be  the  most  probative  exam  for  rating  purposes.    That  exam 
contained  adequate  information  for  rating  and  reflected  the  STRs  overall  level  of  disability 
related to thoracolumbar spine pain.  There is substantial evidence that the CI had significant 
degenerative arthritis of the thoracolumbar spine that justifies application of VASRD code 5242.  
That code utilizes the General Rating Formula for Diseases and Injuries of the Spine to arrive at 
a rating level based on ROM measurements.  The C&P exam documents a non-compensable 
ROM  measurement  of  90  degrees  forward  flexion  of  the  thoracolumbar  spine  with  painful 
motion.  Rating guidance contained in the VASRD grants a rating of 10% for a non-compensable 
ROM measurement with adequate evidence for Painful motion IAW §4.59.  That is the minimal 
compensable  rating  for  the  thoracolumbar  spine  under  the  General  Rating  Formula  for  the 
Spine.    The  next  higher  20%  rating  is  not  warranted  based  on  the  documented  ROM 
measurements evidenced in the most probative examination.  There was no ratable radicular 
component to the CI’s thoracolumbar spine pain.  After due deliberation, considering all of the 
evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (Resolution of reasonable doubt), the Board recommends 
a  disability  rating  of  10%  for  the  degenerative  arthritis  of  the  thoracolumbar  spine  pain 
condition. 
 
Contended PEB Conditions.  The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB 
were the six Category III conditions listed in the rating comparison chart above.  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 a “PEB not unfitting to Board 
unfitting” fitness determination is higher than the VASRD §4.3 (Resolution of reasonable doubt) 
standard used for its rating recommendations, but remains adherent to the DoDI 6040.44 “fair 
and  equitable”  standard.    While  the  left  shoulder  and  right  knee  conditions  were  separately 
profiled,  that  action  was  taken  in  the  immediate  post-surgical  recuperation  period  for  each 
condition  and  each  was  adjudged  as  “fit”  by  two  different  PEBs  after  recuperation.    The 
remaining  four  conditions,  trochanteric  bursitis,  right  elbow  pain,  bilateral  hand  pain,  and 
bilateral ankle instability were not profiled.  None of the contended conditions were specifically 
implicated  in  the  CI’s  commander’s  statement;  and,  none  were  judged  to  be  separately 
unfitting by all previous MEBs, PEBs and the most recent Reconsideration PEB that designated 
all contended conditions as Category III.  All were reviewed by the action officer and considered 
by  the  Board.    There  was  no  indication  from  the  record  that  any  of  these  conditions,  when 
considered individually, interfered with satisfactory duty performance to such a degree that the 
Board  is  compelled  to  overturn  two  PEB  “not  unfitting”  fitness  determinations.    After  due 
deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded that 
there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the 
any  of  the  contended  conditions;  and,  therefore,  no  additional  disability  ratings  can  be 
recommended. 
 
 

6                                                           PD1200867 

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  cervical  spine  pain  condition,  the  Board  unanimously 
recommends a disability rating of 10%, coded 5003 IAW VASRD §4.71a.  In the matter of the 
thoracolumbar spine pain condition, the Board, by a vote of 2:1, recommends a disability rating 
of  10%,  coded  5242  IAW  VASRD  §4.71a.    The  single  voter  of  dissent,  who  voted  for  a  20% 
rating, elected not to submit a minority opinion.  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 his prior medical separation: 
 

VASRD CODE  RATING 
UNFITTING CONDITION 
5003 
Cervical Spine Pain Due to Degenerative Arthritis Condition 
Thoracolumbar Spine Pain Due to Degenerative Arthritis Condition  5242 

COMBINED 

10% 
10% 
20% 

 
 
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 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 

 

xx 
Acting Director 
Physical Disability Board of Review 

7                                                           PD1200867 

MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW  
                                        BOARDS  

Subj:  PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS 

Ref:   (a) DoDI 6040.44 

             (b) CORB ltr dtd 22 Mar 13 
 

      In accordance with reference (a), I have reviewed the cases forwarded by reference (b), and, for 
the reasons provided in their forwarding memorandum, approve the recommendations of the 
PDBR that the following individual’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either 
characterization of separation or in the disability rating previously assigned by the Department of 
the Navy’s Physical Evaluation Board: 
 
 
 

 
 

 

 

     
 
 
 
 

-   former USMC 
-   former USN  
-   former USMC 
-   former USMC 
-   former USN  
-   former USMC 
-   former USMC 
  

 
      
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

  xx 
  Assistant General Counsel 
     (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) 

8                                                           PD1200867