Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02750
Original file (PD-2013-02750.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX    CASE: PD-2013-02750
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141121
SEPARATION DATE: 20070121


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty Army SPC/E-4 (21E10/Heavy Construction Equipment Operator) medically separated for a knee condition. It could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The knee condition, characterized as “residual right knee pain s/p right ACL reconstruction,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB or considered by the PEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “residual right knee pain, post ACL reconstruction” as unfitting, rated 10% with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “Because I was rated by Dod 20% but I am rated 90% plus w/VARD.”


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 rating for the unfitting knee condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. 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 Military Records.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20061117
 VA - (9 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Residual Right Knee Pain, Post ACL Reconstruction 5257 10% Rupture, ACL Right Knee Post Repair with Scars 5299-5260 10% 20071023
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 5
Rating: 10%
 Combined: 50%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 71205 (most proximate to date of separation)


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: The Disability Evaluation System (DES) is responsible for maintaining a fit and vital fighting force. 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. The DES has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation nor for conditions determined to be service-connected by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB. However, the DVA, operating under a different set of laws (Title 38, United States Code), is empowered to compensate all service-connected conditions and to periodically re-evaluate said conditions for the purpose of adjusting the Veteran’s disability rating should the degree of impairment vary over time. 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, compared to VASRD standards, based on severity at the time of separation.

Residual Right Knee Pain Condition. The CI was first evaluated for right knee pain on 12 May 2005 when he reported 2-day history of right knee pain after combative training. He did not improve with duty restrictions and medications which led to a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on 9 June 2005. The MRI showed normal collateral ligaments (on each side of the knee), but degenerative changes in the menisci (cartilage cushions in the knee), and a possible sprain of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL; one of two ligaments inside the knee which provide forward and backward stability). He continued conservative treatment including physical therapy, but had ongoing pain and occasional buckling of the right knee. An orthopedic evaluation (dated omitted) showed ACL instability which was confirmed at arthroscopy performed 16 March 2006 when it was repaired. Degeneration of the medial meniscus was also noted, but the examination was otherwise normal without further instability or loose bodies present. He did not improve sufficiently for full duty and was entered into the MEB process.

At the MEB examination on 20 July 2006 (6 months prior to separation), the CI reported that his knee continued to “give out” and that he could not bend down or step up. The examiner noted an anterior drawer sign which indicated laxity of the ACL, but it was not quantified. The knee was tender overall and painful to flexion. No range-of-motion (ROM) was recorded. The MEB ROM was accomplished in physical therapy on 21 September 2005 and is recorded below. The narrative summary was dated 5 October 2005 and based on an examination on 30 September 2005. It noted that the CI had been sent into the field 6 weeks after the surgery and had missed several physical therapy appointments. On examination, slight laxity of the ACL was present on one maneuver, but not on another. No other testing for instability was positive and there was no swelling. He was tender over the kneecap. Signs of meniscal irritation were not present. Further improvement was anticipated with both decreased activity and continued rehabilitation.

At the VA Compensation and Pension examination performed on 8 December 2006 (9 months after separation), the CI reported that he could not sit with it flexed or straighten it fully. He denied locking and the use of assistive devices, although he did use the handrails going down stairs. He could walk about one mile and could drive although he needed to keep the knee stretched out. On examination, his gait was noted to be “stiff” secondary to the right knee. The knee was stable to examination although movement aggravated the tenderness about the kneecap. Specific testing for meniscal irritation was negative although tenderness along the medial joint line was present (frequently present with meniscal injury, but not diagnostic). The goniometric ROM evaluations in evidence which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, are summarized in the chart below.

Right Knee ROM
(Degrees)		 PT ~ 4 Mo. Pre-Sep VA C&P ~ 9 Mo. Post-Sep
Flexion (140 Normal) 120 122
Extension (0 Normal) 0 0
Comment -- Left knee full ROM
§4.71a Rating 10 % 10 %

The Board directed its attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB and VA both rated the right knee at 10%, but used different coding options, respectively, 5257 (other impairment of the knee), and 5299-5260 (limitation in flexion). The Board considered these and other coding options for the knee, but absent locking, ratable limitation in motion, or further meniscal injury, it found no route to a higher rating. 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 right knee condition. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.


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 residual right knee 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.


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 20111219, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record





                 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
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, AR20150007066 (PD201302750)


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-2013-02213

    Original file (PD-2013-02213.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Right Ankle Condition . Post-operatively, he underwent physical therapy and rehabilitation.The CI was issued a permanent L3 profile dated 18 April 2007 for right knee and ankle pain with restrictions as noted above in the right knee condition section.The commander’s statement noted duty limitations from the ankle and knee.At the MEB examination dated 25 May 2007, the CI reported constant pain in the right leg to include his right ankle.The MEB physical examinationof the ankle, the examiner...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01984

    Original file (PD-2014-01984.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board deliberated on if the CI’s degree of instability with additional meniscal signs of catching and pain with knee degeneration warranted a “severe” 30% rating under 5257, or dual knee rating with additional rating under 5259 for meniscal symptoms (catching and pain)that did not overlap with ACL instability symptoms (instability). The prior to separation VA exam documented normal hand findings. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01745

    Original file (PD-2014-01745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Hyperlipidemia was submitted by the MEB as medically acceptable.The Informal PEBadjudicated “right knee pain” as unfitting at 10%, and “left knee pain” as unfitting at 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). On PE of the knees, the left knee was normal in appearance. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00563

    Original file (PD-2014-00563.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Low Back Pain5299-523710%Chronic Low Back Strain523710%20050706Left knee Pain5099-50030%Residuals L/Knee Lateral Meniscus Repair, Chondromalacia Patella5259-501410%20050706Other x 0 (In Scope)Other x 1 Combined: 10%Combined: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20050811 ( most proximate to date of separation) Low Back Pain Condition . The CI complained of dull constant pain in the left joint line and pain behind the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02796

    Original file (PD-2013-02796.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The physical examination noted normal ROM of the left knee, presence of a scar, and a general comment of “Stable.”The final diagnosis was reported as,“Left knee tibial plateau fracture with ligament injury.”At the MEB NARSUM exam on 6 February 2007, the CI was still using crutches in accordance with the post-operative recovery plan for 8 to 12 weeks of limited weight bearing. Although the ACL and PCL were intact, there was evidence of residual laxity at the time of the PT examination and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00135

    Original file (PD-2014-00135.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Any condition 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 Military Records. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Pain/Instability Left Knee5099-500310%Left Knee Multi-Ligament Injury5010-525710%20070331Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 0 (Not in Scope)20070331 Combined: 10%Combined: 10% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00096

    Original file (PD 2014 00096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The left knee condition, characterized as “chondromalacia of patella,” “tear of medial cartilage or meniscus of knee,” “pain in joint involving lower leg” and “unspecified orthopedic aftercare” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW SECNAVINST 1850.4E. Post-SepFlexion (140 Normal)115105Extension (0 Normal)-0Commentantalgic gait; crepitus;painful motion; antalgic gait§4.71a Rating10%10%The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02131

    Original file (PD-2013-02131.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the history of the injuries and immediate surgeries are presented together in an introduction, followed by separate discussions of the two residual conditions identified by the PEB and adjudicated as unfitting.The Board also noted that the MEB forwarded five RLE conditions to the PEB and the PEB characterized two unfitting conditions: “right knee pain,” which included the MEB listed conditions of right anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) avulsion, post-operative knee arthrofibrosis,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02745

    Original file (PD-2013-02745.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Left knee X-rayson 21 February 2007 were normal.At the MEB examination on 9 March 2007, 3 months prior to separation, the CI reported constant knee pain. Notes in the STR indicated the CI was advised the right knee pain was due to compensation for the left knee injury. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01965

    Original file (PD-2013-01965.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The rating for the unfitting s/p left ACL reconstruction condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Members deliberated if this negatively impacted their ability to render a fair assessment and agreed that the available evidence was sufficiently probative; evidence presumed not accomplished would not materially affect the Board’s final recommendation.The PEB coded the left knee Grade II chondromalacia patellae s/pleft...