Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00132
Original file (PD2013 00132.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:    CASE NUMBER: PD1 300132
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army   BOARD DATE: 2013 0625
Separation Date: 20021125


SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was a temporary tour of active duty Reserve SPC/E-4 (91A10/Medical Equipment Repair Specialist) medically separated for chronic mandible and neck pain. The CI initially suffered a jaw fracture as a result of a fight in 1973 and then refractured his jaw in 1991 due to a motor vehicle accident (MVA) during a dust storm in Saudi Arabia. In January of 2001 while doing physical training, the CI developed pain to his lower neck and bilateral upper back. Despite rehabilitation, neurology, neurosurgery, otolaryngology and dental consultations and extensive physical therapy (PT), the CI failed to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent P3/U3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The MEB forwarded “chronic right mandible and neck pain” to the Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) as medically unacceptable IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also forwarded moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA)-hypopnea with significant desaturation and no positional component, isonicotinic acid hydrazide [INH] induced Hepatitis and latent tuberculosis infection as medically acceptable conditions. The IPEB adjudicated the chronic mandible and neck pain as unfitting, rated 10% with application of the US Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. The CI submitted a request to the Formal PEB (FPEB) for minority member representation upon which the FPEB concu rred. The CI then submitted a r ebuttal of the FPEB findings to the USAPDA , which affirmed the F PEB findings and rating . The CI was then medically separated.


CI CONTENTION : “Not all of my records went to board. Found rest of my records Jan 2008 give to VA.”


 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 mandible and neck condition is addressed below. Any conditions or contention either 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.


invalid font number 31502


RATING COMPARISON :
invalid font number 31502
Service FPEB – Dated 20020912
 VA - (8 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Mandible and Neck Pain 5099-5003 10% Bilateral Temporomandibular Myofascial Pain Dysfunction with Ear Pain 9905 30% 20030228
Cervical Spine Condition due to Trauma 5299-5237 Not Service Connected (NSC) 20030306
Residuals Fracture Mandible 9903 NSC 20030306
Moderate OSA –Hypopnea w/ Significant Desaturation & No Positional Component Medically Acceptable OSA 6847 NSC 20030306
INH Induced Hepatitis Medically Acceptable Hepatitis 7345 NSC 20030306
Latent Tuberculosis Infection Medically Acceptable Latent Tuberculosis 6723 NSC 20030306
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 0 20030306
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 30%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20040122 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY : The Board acknowledges the CI’s information regarding the significant impairment with which his service-connected condition continues to burden him; but, must emphasize that the Disability Evaluation System has neither the role nor the authority to compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions resulting in medical separation. That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set of laws.

Chronic Mandible and Neck Pain Condition . The PEB rated chronic mandible and neck pain under the single analogous 5003 degenerative arthritis code. This coding approach is countenanced by AR 635-40 (B.24 f.), but IAW DoDI 6040.44 uses the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) in arriving at its recommendations, along with all applicable statutes, and any directives in effect at the time of the contested separation (to the extent they do not conflict with the VASRD in effect at the time of the contested separation). The Board must therefore apply separate codes and ratings in its recommendations if compensable ratings for each joint 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 was reasonably justified as unfitting in and of itself, with the caveat that the final recommendation may not produce a lower combined rating than that of the PEB.

Chronic Mandible Pain Condition. The Board first considered if the chronic mandible pain condition, having been de-coupled from the combined PEB adjudication, was reasonably justified as separately unfitting. The service treatment record (STR) includes a long history of mandibular pain with frequent visits and a permanent P3/U3 profile for chronic right mandible and neck pain. The inability to wear a helmet as profiled was at least as likely as not, a result of the mandible pain. The commander’s statement does not specifically address mandibular pain. The MEB narrative summary (NARSUM) does not include an assessment of the mandible and states this condition would be evaluated by oral maxillofacial surgery (OMFS). The NARSUM does state the CI currently had right jaw and neck pain that prevented him from wearing a helmet or performing his job. The physical medicine examiner opined the condition was unlikely to resolve and that CI’s prognosis for gainful employment was guarded. No OMFS MEB NARSUM addendum is available for review. The record does contain records from seven evaluations by OMFS from September 2001 to July 2002 for myofascial pain dysfunction (MPD) and decreased active maximal incisal opening (MIO) ranging from 17mm to 26mm, with the latest one at 21mm. Additional records document a long history of temporomandibular joint (TMJ) syndrome after a fractured mandible in 1973 (on active duty) and a significant exacerbation in 1991 with pain and MIO of 10-15mm after a military motor vehicle accident while deployed to Saudi Arabia. All members agreed that the functional limitations in evidence reasonably justified the conclusion that the condition was integral to the CI’s inability to perform his MOS and accordingly a separate rating is recommended.

The CI initially sustained a jaw fracture in 1973 and then suffered a second mandibular fracture in 1991 from an MVA . The CI was seen in the d ental c linic following the second mandibular fracture for continued pain and pressure in the jaw. The dentist noted physical findings of tenderness over the left and right TMJ ; slight tenderness over the left and right masseter and a maximum jaw opening of 10-15 millimeters (mm) and prescribed a mouth splint . A skull X -ray was negative . The CI developed worsening jaw pain after he hurt his neck doing sit-ups in January 2001. Dental clinic notes in 2001 documented continued TMJ tenderness and radiographs demonstrated moderate bone loss. A dental clinic note in March 2001 noted that the CI was only able to open his mouth half way and had difficulty opening his mouth. The CI had a dental sick call visit in July 2001 for increasing jaw pain with findings of tenderness to palpation (TTP) of the muscles of mastication and TMJ area bilaterally. The dentist advised that because of the TMJ, the CI needed to avoid opening his mouth wide ly and to apply warm moist heat for the chronic jaw pain. In September 2001 , the OMFS noted a mandible opening of 25 mm, 10 mm to the right , and 8mm to the left with tenderness of the right temporal, masseter , and pterygoid . A n X -ray showed osteophytes on the right side. Conservative therapy including a splint was recommended. The CI was evaluated by o rthopedics for jaw pain and they concurred with continuation of the mandible splint. In March 2002, OMFS surgeon noted evidence of TMJ osteoarthritis and again recommended splint therapy and conservative measures. The CI was given a hard night guard for the mouth in March 2002. An MIO of 17 m m on active range-of-motion (ROM), very poor occlusion , and TTP of all mastication muscles was noted in early May 2002 . The MEB NARSUM exam in mid-May 2002, approximately 8 months prior to separation , indicated right jaw pain but did not include any physical examination findings . Subsequent OMFS visits documented continued TTP of involved muscles and MIOs of 21mm on 30 May 2002 (active) and 25 July 2002 (passive, no active measurement noted) . The CI underwent a TMJ nerve block in July 2002 but no information about the results is available . A magnetic resonance imaging ( MRI ) performed in June 2002 demonstrated mild degenerative change of TMJ with bilateral symmetric findings of anteriorly dislocated disk at rest with partial recapture on opening and limited excursion was also noted. The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) d ental examination approximately 3 months after separation noted that the CI wore a splint for a short time but this exacerbated his pain and that his pain averaged between 6-8/10 , with occasional exacerbations to 10/10 . At the time of the exam, the CI was unable to open his mouth fully without manual manipulation . T he CI also reported locking of his jaw at times , both open and closed. Physical findings included an MIO of 11mm with a manual opening of greater than 30mm, a right lateral excursion of 7mm , and a left lateral excursion of 10mm; a severe malocclusion with multiple misaligned teeth and a bilateral posterior cross bite; significant pain in the right temporal, right TMJ , and right subcortical area; mild to moderate pain in the left temporal area, left TMJ, and right masseter area. The diagnosis was MPD , moderate to severe and bilateral TMJ inflammation, right greater than left.

The Board directs attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . As described above, the PEB bundled both conditions in its application of the USAPDA pain policy. The VA coded the b ilateral t emporomandibular MPD with e ar p ain condition 9905 ( t emporomandibular articulation, limited motion of) and rat ed at 30% for Inter-incisal range (MIO) of 11 to 20 mm. The P3 U3 profile was issued for chronic mandible and neck pain and the CI was restricted from wearing his helmet likely due to the fact that the strap would cause mandible pain. Throughout the STR there is clear and ample evidence that demonstrates MIOs between 10 to 25mm. The OMFS exam approximately 4 months prior to separation noted a n MIO of 21mm. The C&P exam documented that at approximately 3 months after separation, the CI had a n MIO of 11mm. The Board adjudged that the exams in this case occurred approximately equidistant from the date of separation , but the Ju ly 2002 OMFS examination was prior to separation, and therefore it had the higher probative value. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mi ndful of VASRD §4.3 r easonable doubt, the Board recommends a disability rating of 20% for the c hronic m andible p ain condition coded 9905.

Chronic Neck Pain Condition : The Board first considered if the chronic neck pain condition, having been de-coupled from the combined PEB adjudication, was reasonably justified as independently unfitting. The STR includes a long history of cervical spine pain with regular visits, and a permanent P3/U3 profile for chronic right mandible and neck pain. The inability to wear a backpack, carry and fire a rifle, and lift any weight is, more likely than not, a result of the neck pain. The commander’s statement documented an inability to perform the duties of his MOS due to the aggravation of his neck pain. All members agreed that the functional limitations in evidence reasonably justified the conclusion that the condition was integral to the CI’s inability to perform his MOS rating; and, accordingly a separate rating is recommended.

There were several range - of - motion (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.

Cervical ROM
(Degrees)
 PT ~ 8 Mo.
Pre-Sep
 MEB ~ 6 Mo. Pre-Sep VA C&P ~ 3.5 Mo. Post-Sep
Flex (45 Normal)
 20 No goniometrics 15
Extension (45)
 40 35
R Lat Flexion (45)
 25 15 *
L Lat Flexion (45)
 20 20
R R otation 80 )
 40 50 *
L Rotation (8 0)
 25 60
Combined (340)
 170 195
Comment
 All limited by pain ; testing increased pain to 8/10; strength 5/5 Slight decreased ROM; ROM with pain o n end r ange extension and bending to right ; multiple bilateral trigger points paraspinals, right neck, upper back; tender p o ints in bilateral anterior cervical areas ; motor strength and reflexes were normal; sensation was decreased to light touch and pinprick in a patchy non-dermatomal pattern Tender to palpation midline form midcervical to cervical-thoracic junction, more so on the right paraspinous muscles; n o palpable muscle spasms; * movement led to increased right paraspinous muscle pain; negative compression and distension (Waddell) tests; guarded ROM of RUE ; normal strength and reflexes; vague and diffuse altered sensation in a non- dermatomal pattern
§4.71a Rating
 20% 10% 30%

The CI developed right sided neck pain and worsening jaw pain after doing sit - ups in January 2001 and was seen in the e mergency r oom (ER) . A cervical spine X -ray performed in the ER was normal. An MRI performed at that time showed minimal spondylosis. The CI was evaluated by n eurosurgery for axial neck pain and bilateral upper extremity pain and the examination was within normal limits . The examiner noted significant effort was required to get the CI to cooperate with the examination. He recommended and electromyelogram ( EMG ) and nerve con duction studies and noted that, if these were abnormal, surgical treatment could be warranted. An EMG of the right upper extremity was normal. The n eurologist diagnosed subjective mechanical cervical pain and recommended a p hysical m edicine consult. T he r ehabilitat ion specialist diagnosed the CI with chronic cervical myofascial pain. C ervical spine X -rays performed in September 2001 demonstrated mild bilateral C5-6 foraminal narrowing. The CI was followed by Army physical therapy for the neck condition from September 2001 to March 200 2 and treatments included traction and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation without relief of pain . The MEB NARSUM noted chronic neck pain as well as pain rated six to seven out of ten in the right proximal arm and upper back . His pain di d not respond to treatment with physical therapy or medication and he was placed in m ed ical h old at B rooke A rmy M edical C enter so he could be near his son and his mother. His pain would occasionally reach 10 out of 10 after increased activities and was sometimes only 2 to 3 out of 10 . The current status noted pain rated at seven to ten out of ten from his right ear to his neck and 4 to 5 out of 10 to his right arm. He had stopped all medications. The MEB physical exam findings are summarized in the chart above. N o ROM measurements were taken but physical therapy documented the measurements noted in the chart above from an examination 2   months prior. The c ommander’s s tatement documented that the CI could not perform his MOS duties because of aggravation of his neck injury . The CI was given a permanent P3 / U3 p rofile for chronic right mandible and neck pain with limitations of no Army Physical Fitness Test and no use of helmet or rucksack . The C&P exam documented constant cervicothoracic to right upper arm pain that increased with use of the arm, movements of the hand, and head movements, especially looking to the right and up and down. The C&P physical exam findings are summarized in the chart above.

The chronic neck condition was rated IAW the 2002 VASRD standards that are no longer in effect. The 2002 VASRD coding and rating standards for the spine, which were in effect at the time of separation, were changed on 23 September 2002 for code 5293 intervertebral disc syndrome criteria, and then changed to the current §4.71a rating standards on 26 September 2003. The 2002 standards for rating based on ROM impairment were subject to the rater’s opinion regarding degree of severity, whereas the current standards specify rating thresholds in degrees of ROM impairment. When older cases have goniometric measurements in evidence, the Board reconciles (to the extent possible) its opinion regarding degree of severity for the older spine codes and ratings with the objective thresholds specified in the current VASRD §4.71a general rating formula for the spine. This promotes uniformity of its recommendations for different cases from the same period and more conformity across dates of separation, without sacrificing compliance with the DoDI 6040.44 requirement for rating IAW the VASRD in effect at the time of separation.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. As described above, the PEB bundled the chronic neck with the mandible condition in its application of the USAPDA pain policy. The VA determined the cervical spine condition due to trauma was NSC stating there was no evidence that a chronically disabling condition had been diagnosed. The B oard cannot explain why the VA based their rating decision on evidence that no chronically disabling condition was diagnosed. The CI’s cervical spine condition was well documented in the STR as occurring while doing sit-ups. The c ommander’s s tatement specifically documented the neck problem as b eing the cause of the CI’s inability to fulfill his MOS duties. All exams prior to separation demonstrated decreased and painful motion. The ROM measurements both prior to physical therapy and afte r (C&P) s eparation are quite similar, however the cervical flexion at the VA examination was slightly less at 15 degrees as opposed to 20 degrees on the physical therapy exam. Although no ROM measurements were recorded at the MEB NARSUM examination, the remainder of the physical examination was remarkably similar to the VA examination and there does not appear to be any significant change over time. With normal cervical flexion at 45 degrees, both of these measurements indicate significant limitation of motion. Today’s VASRD assigns a 30% rating for cervical flexion of 15 degrees or less and this can be considered to be a severe limitation of motion. Today’s VASRD also assigns a 20% rating for cervical flexion greater than 15 degrees but not greater than 30 degrees and this can be considered to be a moderate limitation of motion. The Board adjudged that although the MEB NARSUM examination and the physical therapy ROM measurements were further away in time from the date of separation, they occurred prior to separation, and therefore had the higher probative value. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 r easonable doubt, the Board recommends a disability rating of 20% for the c hronic n eck p ain condition coded 5290.

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 the USAPDA pain policy ( 635-40) for rating the c hronic m andible and n eck p ain condition was operant in this case and the condition was adjudicated independently of that policy by the Board. In the matter of the c hronic m andible and n eck p ain condition, the Board by a vote of 2:1 recommends that each joint be separately adjudicated as follows: an unfitting c hronic m andible p ain condition coded 9905 and rated 20% IAW VASRD §4.150 and an unfitting c hronic n eck p ain condition coded 5290 and rated 20%, IAW VASRD §4.71a. The single voter for dissent, who recommended an unfitting c hronic m andible p ain condition coded 9905 and rated 20% IAW VASRD §4.150 and an unfitting c hronic n eck p ain condition coded 5290 and rated 10%, IAW VASRD §4.71a, did not elect 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 and, that the discharge with severance pay be recharacterized to reflect permanent disability retirement, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation:

UNFITTING CONDITION
 VASRD CODE RATING
Chronic Mandible Pain 9905 2 0%
Chronic Neck Pain 5290 2 0%
COMBINED
 4 0%


The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20 130329 , w/atchs
Exhib it B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans ’ Affairs Treatment Record




Physical Disability Board of Review


SFMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(TAPD-ZB),


SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation
for AR20130018776 (PD201300132)


1. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554(a), I approve the enclosed recommendation of the Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) pertaining to the individual named in the subject line above to recharacterize the individual’s separation as a permanent disability retirement with the combined disability rating of 40% effective the date of the individual’s original medical separation for disability with severance pay.

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:

         a. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual was separated by reason of permanent disability retirement effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay.

         b. Providing orders showing that the individual was retired with permanent disability effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay.

         c. Adjusting pay and allowances accordingly. Pay and allowance adjustment will account for recoupment of severance pay, and payment of permanent retired pay at 40% effective the date of the original medical separation for disability with severance pay.

         d. Affording the individual the opportunity to elect Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and medical TRICARE retiree options.

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                                                 
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01771

    Original file (PD-2013-01771.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    SEPARATION DATE: 20040520 SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active dutyE-6 (Infantryman)medically separated for right shoulder, neck and right temporomandibular pain.Theseconditions could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirementsof hisMilitary Occupational Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards.He was issued a permanent U3 profileand referred for a Medical Evaluation Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00114

    Original file (PD2012 00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The MEB forwarded bilateral ulnar neuropathy at the elbow, chronic neck pain, chronic LBP, and mood disorder with depressive features due to ulnar neuropathy and post-surgical pain unresolved conditions to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The Board first considered if both the chronic neck pain and chronic LBP conditions, having been de-coupled from the combined PEB adjudication, were each reasonably justified as independently unfitting. Physical Disability Board of Review

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02524

    Original file (PD-2013-02524.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam approximately 6.5 months after separation documented that the CI had constant daily neck pain rated at 7/10, neck stiffness occurred with turning the neck to any side with radiation down both upper extremities with feelings of hand weakness during an acute exacerbation. invalid font number 31502 RECOMMENDATION : The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows; and, that the discharge with severance pay be...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01525

    Original file (PD-2014-01525.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVASRD standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The CI was given a permanent U3 profile for cervical degenerative disease (neck pain) and another medical condition, with a Code C and specific restrictions noted on the profile.The VA C&P exam approximately 2 months prior to separation documented that the CI reported...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00021

    Original file (PD 2014 00021.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    CI CONTENTION :“Worsening condition of thoracic spine and cervical spine strain. Chronic Neck Pain Condition . RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI's disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00161

    Original file (PD2013 00161.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The ratings for the unfitting neck and back conditions are addressed below. The PT note on 16March 2007, 3 months prior to separation recorded bubble inclinometer ROM without specification of the method used, or normal values, at flexion 21 degrees, and extension 9 degrees with pain.The MEB NARSUM exam on 23 April 2007, approximately2 months prior to separation, documented that the CI’s LBP symptoms had slowly worsened and that he had undergone rest, activity modification, anti-inflammatory...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00749

    Original file (PD-2014-00749.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Separation Date: 20051117 Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Neck & Shoulder Pain due to Myofascial Pain Syndrome & C7 Facet Degeneration523710%Cervical Strain w/Myofascial Pain Syndrome5323-523710%20060228Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 2 Rating: 10%Combined Rating: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD) dated 20060427 (most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) invalid font number 31502 Chronic Neck and Shoulder Pain Condition. The CI was evaluated by...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01278

    Original file (PD-2014-01278.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The lumbar spine and jaw conditions, characterized as “chronic low back pain due to degenerative joint and disc disease” and “chronic jaw pain and TMJ dysfunction secondary to traumatic fracture andORIF,” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.The MEB also identified and forwarded two other conditions(right knee pain due to osteoarthritis and parasomnia not otherwise specified [NOS]) for PEB adjudication.The Informal PEB adjudicated “degenerative arthritis,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01026

    Original file (PD2011-01026.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Neck Condition . The Board therefore, recommends a rating of 10% for the neck pain condition. The Board therefore, recommends a rating of 10% for the lower back pain condition.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00406

    Original file (PD-2012-00406.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB determined that the herniated disc in the L4‐L5 region (the Board noted that it was actually in the L5S1 region) and chronic LBP were medically unacceptable and forwarded the two conditions for Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication. The PEB adjudicated the chronic LBP with (an) L5S1 herniated disc conditions as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). (2) is limited to those conditions which were determined by...