Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02719
Original file (PD-2013-02719.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX        CASE: PD -201 3-02719
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army   BOARD DATE: 201 5 0603
Separation Date: 20060410


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E-4 (Indirect Fire Infantry) medically separated for a left knee disability . The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS). He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a n Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). C hronic left knee pain was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded three other conditions (see rating chart below) for PEB adjudication. The Informal PEB adjudicated the left knee condition as unfitting, rated 0% with likely application of AR 635-40 and 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 : He was given a higher rating from the VA. His complete submission is at Exhibit A.


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 condition 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 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.

invalid font number 31502
RATING COMPARISON :
invalid font number 31502
IPEB – Dated 20060213
 VA* - (~2 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Left Knee Pain 5010 0% Residuals, Internal Derangement Left Knee, S/P Meniscus Tear 5261 30% 20060615
Pigmented Glaucoma Not Unfitting Bilateral Pigmentary Glaucoma 6013 10% 20060622
Hypertension Not Unfitting Hypertension 7101 10% 20060615
Cholesterol Not Unfitting Hyperlipidemia 7099-7005 NSC 20060615
Other MEB/PEB Conditions x 0 (Not In Scope)
RATING: 0%
 RATING: 60%
*Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060821 (most proxima te to date of separation (DOS))


ANALYSIS SUMMARY :

 Chronic Left Knee Pain . The CI slipped on ice and injured his left knee in December 2004. He underwent weekly left knee physical therapy (PT) from February through April 2005 without any improvement. The left knee MRI done in April 2005 showed slight cartilage thinning along the inner knee; however , there was no meniscal tear. An o rthopedi c evaluation noted left knee pain and that no surgery was indicated. The C I continued to have left knee pain with tenderness popping and intermittent numbness in his leg. The DD Form 2808, Report of Medical Examination, dated 16 December 2005, dated 4 months prior to separation, documented “pain on palpation and ROM” for the lower extremity exam. The MEB n arrative s ummary (NARSUM) exam performed 3 months prior to separation documented continuous, chronic left knee pain. The NARSUM physical exam documented flexion to 125 degrees (normal 140) and “full extension” with no change on repetition (cited range-of-motions (ROM) matched the PT evaluation) . A n eurolog y evaluation performed 2 months after the NARSUM noted complaints of intermittent numbness and tingling in the feet and pain in both knees with the left worse than the right. The physical exam showed normal motor exam in the lower extremities and slowed reflexes in the knees. A left lower extremity nerve conduction study (NCS) done in March 2006 was normal.

 The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam completed 2 months after separation documented that the CI had functional limitations of an inability to stand longer than 30 minutes, an inability to walk more than one mile and difficulty with stair climbing. The CI reported that his knees ached constantly on a pain scale of 6/10 with flares of 8/10 that lasted for several minutes, stiffness, weakness and moderate flares that occurred weekly and the knee joint would pop frequently. He indicated he had an MRI that showed a torn meniscus. The VA C&P physical exam documented a normal gait with tenderness, guarding and knee joint pops on bending. There was difficulty balancing on the left leg (could balance on the right). ROM was documented as “Extension: Lacks 10 degrees from full knee extension w/ (with) pain from lacking 25 degrees to lacking 10 degrees. The range of motion and joint function of the left knee is additionally limited by pain from lacking 25 to lacking 10 degrees of extension and from 117-125 degrees of flexion following repetitive use.” [Of note, the right knee was similarly addressed with pain from lacking 22 to lacking 7 degrees of extension.] X-ray of bilateral knees documented minimal degenerative changes of the right knee, but was normal for the left knee. A NCS/ electromyelogram (EMG) done on the left lower extremity in June 2006 was normal.

The Board directed attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . The PEB coded the chronic left knee pain condition as 5010 ( a rthritis, due to trauma, substantiated by X-ray findings ) and rated at 0%. The PEB disability description stated “essentially full range - of - motion and pain with motion” which was likely application of AR 635-40, B-29 which indicated “ratings for loss of joint motion can only be awarded where a mechanical basis for limited motion is found.” The VA coded the residuals, internal derangement left knee, status post meniscus tear condition as 5261 (l eg, limitation of extension of ) and rated at 30% based on “e xtension limited to 20 degrees.” The MEB and PEB noted painful motion which would warrant a 10% rating IAW VASRD §4.59 (painful motion) or consideration of the criteria under dis ability code 5003 “ … limitation of motion of the specific joint or joints involved is noncompensable under the appropriate diag nostic codes, a rating of 10% is for application for each such major joint or group of minor joints affected …”

The VA exam was closer to separation and was a more complete exam ; however, the source ROM exam was written in a manner which may have been easily misinterpreted. Evaluation of that exam indicated there was a painful arc from extension lacking 25 degrees to lacking 10 degrees with additional pain on repetition; the pain-limited ROM was adjudged as “lacks 10 degrees” and did not support the VARD’s interpretation of “ lacking up to 2 5 degrees , ” especially as the gait was documented as normal. Knee extension lacking 10 degrees would rate 10% under code 5261 ( or 5010 or 5003 ) . There was no objective evidence of knee instability for potential dual coding, and no frequent episodes of “locking” and effusion for alternative higher analogous meniscal rating. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board recommends a disability rating of 10% for the l eft k nee condition coded 5099- 5010.

 Contended PEB Conditions. The contended conditions adjudicated as not unfitting by the PEB were pigmented glaucoma, hypertension and cholesterol. 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 preponderance of the evidence but remains adherent to the DoDI 6040.44 “fair and equitable” standard.

None of these conditions were profiled; none were implicated in the c ommander’s s tatement; and none were judged to fail retention standards. All were reviewed and considered by the Board. There was no indication from the record that any of these conditions significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance. 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 pigmented glaucoma, hypertension and cholesterol contended conditions ; 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. As discussed above, PEB reliance on AR 635-40 for rating the knee condition was likely operant in this case and the condition was adjudicated independently of that instruction by the Board. In the matter of the left k nee condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability rating of 10 %, coded 5099- 5010 IAW VASRD §4.71a. In the matter of the pigmented glaucoma, hypertension and cholesterol contended 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 his prior medical separation:

UNFITTING CONDITION
 VASRD CODE RATING
Chronic Left Knee Pain 5099- 5010 1 0%
COMBINED
 1 0%
invalid font number 31502


The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 131218 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans ’ Affairs Treatment Record


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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , AR20150012734 (PD201302719)
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 10% 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                                                  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                                      Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                                                      (Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA










Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00205

    Original file (PD2009-00205.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical basis for the separation was moderate to severe bilateral knee pain and chronic left shoulder impingement syndrome. Despite the CI’s contention of worsening during assignment at Aberdeen PG, there is no evidence that it exceeded normal progression of the disease, or that service permanently aggravated the condition. As each knee had painful motion short of VA normal ROMs, each knee should be separately rated at 10% IAW §4.59 Painful motion.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00364

    Original file (PD2009-00364.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Condition 3 : Other Conditions After careful consideration of all available information, the Board unanimously concluded that the CI’s condition is appropriately rated at a combined 20% for right and left knee osteoarthritis and no recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination is warranted. The Air Force PEB rated under VASRD 5003 and the Board finds this code and rating is appropriate.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01932

    Original file (PD-2014-01932.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The low back and left knee conditions, characterized as “chronic low back pain” and “patellofemoral pain/chondromalacia patella, left knee,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.Hypertension and bunionectomy conditions were submitted by the MEB as medically acceptable.The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic low back pain (LBP) and chronic pain of the left knee”as unfitting, rated 10% and 0% respectively, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00716

    Original file (PD2011-00716.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    (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. At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam, performed 5 months after separation, the CI reported pain in the left knee on an intermittent basis without loss of motion, and confirmed that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02661

    Original file (PD-2013-02661.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Left Knee and Left Hip Pain5099-50030%Left Knee Tendonitis5260-502410%20051115Left Hip Strain525110%20051115HypertensionNot Unfitting Hypertension710110%20051115Other x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 4 RATING: 0%RATING: 50% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20060621(most proximate to date of separation (DOS)). Left Knee and Left Hip Pain. In the matter of the left knee condition, the Board unanimously recommends a disability...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02422

    Original file (PD-2013-02422.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    She reported “some ‘give way’ symptoms approximately five to six times per week” and “some catching but no true locking.” The MEB physical exam (DD Form 2808 dated 18 November 2005; 7 months prior to separation) documented left knee mild diffuse swelling with multiple scars. The NARSUM dated 25 April 2006 (2 months prior to separation) referenced the orthopedic consult exam findings above and documented active ROM that was -3 to 122 degrees symmetrically on both knees (normal 0-140 degrees)...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00126

    Original file (PD2009-00126.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The medical bases for the separation was a back condition and a bilateral knee condition. The Board has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. The PEB rated both knees under the VASRD coded 5003 for two major joints.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01906

    Original file (PD2012 01906.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A third and final MEB in October 2002 forwarded the bilateral knee condition, characterized as bilateral patellofemoral syndrome, status post(s/p) left patellar tendon to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) IAW 1850.4E.The MEB also identified and forwarded left shoulder superior labral tear, s/p arthroscopic repair and left hip greater trochanteric bursitis for IPEB adjudication. The IPEB adjudicated bilateral patellofemoral syndrome (PFS) as unfitting, rated 10%, with application...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01087

    Original file (PD-2012-01087.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ** R knee 10% effective from 20031021 Service PEB – Dated 20021219 Condition Code Left Knee Pain 5003 ↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓ Rating 0% Exam 20%* 20040320 Code 5010 Rating VA (12 Mos. RECOMMENDATION: The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01562

    Original file (PD-2013-01562.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pre-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Left Knee Pain5099-50030%Degenerative Changes Left Knee5260-501010%20040915Other x 0 (Not in Scope) Combined: 0%Combined: 20% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20041230(most proximate to date of separation (DOS)) Left Knee Pain with Chondromalacia Grade 1/2 Condition . At the MEB exam, 6 months prior to separation, the CI reported continuing left knee pain and recurrent episodes of locking. BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI...