Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01165
Original file (PD-2013-01165.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     CASE: PD -20 1 3 - 0 116 5
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army   BOARD DATE: 201 50304
Separation Date: 20050913


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E-4 (Aircraft Power Plant Repairer) medically separated for left hallux valgus. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) , however, his profile allowed for an alternate aerobic event to satisfy physical fitness standards . He was issued a permanent L3 /S1 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The left foot condition, characterized as “hallux valgus status post (s/p) surgery x 2, including bunionectomy with persistent left foot pain” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded six other conditions that d id not fall below retention standards ( p osttraumatic s tress d isorder [ PTSD ] and cyclothymic disorder with anxiety and depression , hypertension, chronic intermittent neck and back pain, seasonal allergies, smoker , and dental problems) for PEB adjudication. The Informal PEB adjudicated “left hallux valgus” as unfitting, rated 10% with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) . The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : The CI elaborated no specific contention in his application.


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 when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the PEB, but determined to be not unfitting. Any conditions outside the Board’s defined scope of review and any contention not requested in this application may remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military/Naval Records. Furthermore, the Board’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections, where appropriate. The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the VASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The Board has neither the role nor the authority to compensate for post-separation progression or complications of service-connected conditions. That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set of laws. 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.

In addition, the Secretary of Defense Mental Health Review Terms of Reference directed a comprehensive review of Service members with certain mental health (MH) conditions referred to a disability evaluation process between 11 September 2001 and 30 April 2012 that were changed or eliminated during that process. The MH condition was reviewed regarding diagnosis change, fitness determination and rating in accordance with VASRD §4.129 and §4.130.
RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20050830
 VA - (2 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Left Hallux Valgus 5280 10% S/P Left Foot Surgeries 5284 10% 20051110
PTSD /Cyclothymic disorder w/Anxiety & Depression Not Unfitting PTSD w/Mood Disorder 9411 50% 20051110
Other x 5 (Not In Scope)
 Other x 5
Rating: 10%
 Combined: 60%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060407 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS])


ANALYSIS SUMMARY :

Left Hallux Valgus Condition . The CI developed left foot pain during road marches and marching activities during basic training in December 2002. Initially he only had pain while wearing his Army boots ; however , the pain worsened and he developed pain with street shoes as well . The p odiatrist , on 18 March 2003 , noted pain in the first metatarsal phalangeal joint (MTPJ) of the left foot. The physical exam findings were a left foot bunion on the first MTPJ with hallux valgus. The examiner recommended conservative treatment and prescribed shoe inserts and a temporary profile . A bilateral foot X -ray showed a moderate hallux valgus ( bump on the side of the big toe) of the left foot with a bunion ( changes in the boney framework on the front part of the foot) , with the right foot showing only a small bunion. The CI deployed to Iraq and remained on profile for his entire tour. Once re - deployed, he sought p odiatric care for the persistent foot pain . He underwent a left great toe bunionectomy on 18 June 2004. The CI was seen in Acute Care for numbness and tingling at the surgical site. The p odiatrist documented constant sharp to dull first left hallux pain with physical exam findings of tenderness to palpation over the first MTPJ. A left foot X -ray showed no displacement of the screw. The CI had persistent pain and underwent hardware removal and bone realignment on 4 April 2005 . A 4- week post-operative X -ray showed no left foot pathology. The c ommander’s s tatement indicated the CI could not perform his basic MOS duties due to his physical limitations and he had a noticeable limp when walking. A podiatry addendum approximately a month prior to separation documented chronic left foot pain with painful motion. The MEB n arrative s ummary (NARSUM) exam approximately a month prior to separation documented that although the second foot surgery increased the range of motion, the CI still had daily pain. The minimum daily pain was rated at 3/10 intensity with an occasional increase in pain to 10/10 which would occur approximately three to four times every month. The examiner referenced the MEB H&P DD Form 2807 for physical exam findings of numbness and tingling along with joint pain. The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam approximately a month prior to separation noted constant left foot pain when standing, sitting or lying down. The CI reported severe pain if he walked a ny considerable distance and was unable to run for fear of provoking intense pain in the left toe. He had flare-ups with weight bearing. The physical exam findings were two scars on the volar foot surface that were purplish red in color, slightly swollen with exquisite tenderness, and an inability to stand on the left foot.
The Board direct ed attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . The PEB coded 5280 ( l eft h allux v algus ) condition , unilateral h allux valgus, rated 10% , the only available compensable rating for this code. The VA coded the s tatus post l eft f oot s urgeries condition as 5284 ( f oot injuries ) other rated 10%, m oderate. The record in evidence demonstrated that all exams proximate to separation documented pain with ambulation. The Board considered an alternate coding of 5003 with application of painful motion and 5284 ; however , neither coding schema would result in a higher rating. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence , and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the l eft h allux v algus condition.

Contended PTSD /Cyclothymic Condition. The Board reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System . The evidence of the available records shows a diagnosis of PTSD/cyclothymic disorder was rendered and no change in diagnosis was made at any time; therefore, this case did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. The MH condition adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB was PTSD /cyclothymic disorder with anxiety and depression . The Board’s fi rst charge with respect to this condition is an assessment of the appropriateness of the PEB’s fitness adjudication. The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt) standards used for its rating recommendations, and require a preponderance of evidence.

The p sychiatric a ddendum to the MEB approximately a month prior to se paration documented that the CI’s symptom of anxiety began during his 2003 deployment to Iraq. He began having panic attacks fr equently, reported suicidal ideation , and other symptoms suggestive of depression and PTSD . While on mid-tour leave, he presented to the MH clinic and was diagnosed with depression. He returned to Iraq with medication but after 2 months he ran out of medicine , however, his symptoms had improved and he had do ne well. He completed his tour and returned stateside in March 2004. Treatment records were silent until the July 2005 NARSUM. The NARSUM indicated the CI did not deploy with his unit in 2005 because he had foot problems. He reported his nightmares had recurred, and he once again presented to MH and was diagnosed with cyclothymia and PTSD. He was treated with medication that helped his sleep a nd terminated his nightmares. His panic attacks were infrequent and “ se emed to be related to stimuli associated with being in Iraq ” . At the NARSUM exam , the examiner stated, the CI “had no psychotic symptoms, no behavioral probl ems, legal trouble , or difficulty with work as a result of his symptoms . ” Although the CI was taking medications for the mood disorder, the examiner noted that he was motivated for treatment and recovery and was doing well. The examiner documented his prognosis as good with continued treatment. The CI was diagnosed with cyclothym ic disorder, mild to moderate, and PTSD, both with minimal impairment for military duty and a mild impairment for social and industrial adaptability . The Gl obal Assessment of Functioning was 61 ( connoting some mild difficulty in social, occupational, or school functioning, but generally functioning pretty well ) . He also had some meaningful interpersonal relationships.

The VA C&P exam approximately a month after separation documented continued ni ghtmares, other symptoms of PTSD and mood disorder . Additionally, the CI reported episod es of auditory hallucinations of hearing a voice call his name. However, his mental status examination was unremarkable and active psychosis was not identified. There was no evidence of psychiatric hospitalizations or visits to the emergency room for MH symptoms. The CI was married and working full-time as an air frame contractor. Although symptoms recorded at the C&P exam were significantly more than during the NARSUM, 2 months after separation , the record reflected minimal symptoms in the year prior to separation, and indicated that his symptoms were responsive to medication. The PTSD and cyclothymic condition s w ere not profiled or implicated in the c ommander’s s tatement as causing any duty impairment. Additionally, the CI did not endorse any MH- related symptoms or significant events associated with the development of MH symptoms on the Post-Deployment Health Questionnaire he completed upon his return from Iraq. The MH conditions were not judg ed to fail retention standards . There was no indication from the record that any MH condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance. A fter due deliberation , and in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the PTSD /cyclothymic condition s and therefore, no additional disability ratings 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. 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 l eft h allux v algus condition , and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the contended PTSD /cyclothymic condition, the Board unanimously recommends no change from the PEB determination as not unfitting. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.


 RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re - characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination .


The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 130814 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record







invalid font number 31506 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
DoD Physical Disability Board of Review



SAMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(AHRC-DO), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557


SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , AR20150010408 (PD201301165)


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              XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                           Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                            (Review Boards)
                                                     
CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-00868

    Original file (PD-2013-00868.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20061020 The bilateral foot conditions, characterized by the MEB as “hallux valgus” and “bilateral pes planus,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. There were no other MH treatment notes for review.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01819

    Original file (PD2012 01819.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 bilateral foot pain condition, but does recommend a change in the diagnostic descriptor to chronic right foot pain.The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that left foot condition as not unfitting. The Board noted only one evaluation in the record...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD 2010 00402

    Original file (PD 2010 00402.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI was placed on limited duty and underwent a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The PEB adjudged the major depression condition as an unfitting “ overall effect” condition, without applying a VA diagnostic code. Considering the hospitalization, noted symptoms, intensive treatment, and significant lost duty time due to the CI’s mental disorder, and in consideration of the totality of the evidence, the DoDI 6040.44 “fair and equitable” standard was adequately met to adjudge the major...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00278

    Original file (PD2012-00278.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the chronic right foot pain condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The other requested conditions [headaches, TBI, lower back pain, hernia, bleeding in my anus, lower back herniated, and PTSD] are not within the Board’s purview. The VA also rated the right foot pain at 10%, but coded it 5280-5284, hallux valgus and other foot conditions, respectively.

  • 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01495

    Original file (PD2012 01495.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The CI then returned with left foot pain and was diagnosed by bone scan in June 2001 to have another metatarsal stress fracture; she was again treated. The VA rated the right foot pain and the left foot pain separately, each as 5299-5284 (analogous to other foot injury) at 10% (moderate), combined with bilateral factor to 20%. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for AR20130009110 (PD201201495)I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense...

  • 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 | PD2011-00984

    Original file (PD2011-00984.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The right hallux valgus/limitus condition (bunion surgery and post-surgical result) was the principle cause of the right foot pain surgery and chronic right foot pain and was considered in rating the CI’s primary unfitting foot pain condition. The VA exam summary for pes planus is discussed above and all symptoms from the pes planus condition were considered in the rating of the foot pain condition. In the matter of the contended pes planus and hallux valgus conditions, the Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00036

    Original file (PD2012-00036.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (44B/Welder), medically separated for bilateral bunion pain status post surgical correction of the left and of the right foot (joint at base of big toe). The PEB combined the right foot bunion pain condition and left foot bunion pain condition as a single unfitting condition, coded analogously to 5280 and rated 0%. I direct that all the Department of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01640

    Original file (PD-2013-01640.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain, Left Ankle0%Left Ankle Strain5299-528420%20051110+20050610recordsBunion, Right Foot5280---%Hallux Valgus, Right Great Toe52800%20051110Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 12 RATING: 0%RATING: 60% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20060501(most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) Chronic Pain, Left Ankle Condition . The records noted normal feet on the CI’s entry exam (see above) and right foot pain had onset...