Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 01197
Original file (PD2013 01197.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX         CASE: PD 13-01197      
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20140115
Date of Permanent SEPARATION: 20030816  


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (44E/Machinist) medically separated for bilateral foot pain. His foot pain began in 1992 and he has had intermittent pain since then. The condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The bilateral foot condition, characterized as “chronic left and right foot pain (pes planus)” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The informal PEB adjudicated “bilateral foot pain” as unfitting, rated 10%. The CI made no appeals, and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “I sacrificed 13 ½ yrs of my life nearing a retirement, my medical condition changed that and caused great hardships in my health both physically and mentally and financially. My discharge disability of flat feet also led to additional problems such as knee and back problems, along with asthma, I’m forced to be much less active which in turn led to weight gain and depression. In 2009 I was self admitted to the Army substance abuse program for chemical dependency where I was diagnosed with PTSD. In 2010 after 7 years of civil service I was placed on the Priority Placement Program where I had requested for Florida. In 2011 I was given one chance to accept Colorado or be unemployed. I took it however after only a couple months I had to resign due to treatment altitude.”


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 Service rating for the unfitting bilateral foot condition is addressed below; and, no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The requested knee, back, weight gain, mental health, and substance abuse conditions were not identified by the PEB, and thus are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. 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 Military Disability Evaluation System (DES) has neither the role nor the authority to compensate service 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 Veteran Affairs (VA), operating under a different set of laws. 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 (BCMR).



RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20030205
 VA - based on Service Treatment Records (STR)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Bilateral Foot Pain 5276 10% Bilateral Pes Planus 5276 10% STR
No Additional MEB/PEB Entries
 Other x 2 STR
Combined: 10%
 Combined: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 30529 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Bilateral Pes Planus Condition. The CI was first seen for flat feet (pes planus) on 30 January 2002 after a road march. He was found to have bilateral pes planus on x-rays that day. Previously, he had been treated for an ankle sprain and acute fracture of the foot. He was issued orthotics, but continued to have pain with prolonged standing and running. On 28 August 2002 he was noted to have also been diagnosed with bilateral plantar fasciitis. He failed to improve adequately with conservative treatment and was entered into the DES process on 1 October 2002 and a P3 profile initiated. The narrative summary (NARSUM) was dictated on 5 December 2002, eight months prior to separation. The examiner noted that the CI had had problems with foot pain going back to 1992, but that he had done well until January 2001 (actually, 2002 per the records) when he aggravated his foot pain during a road march. Conservative management was noted as insufficient for him to return to full duty. On examination, he had obvious pes planus bilaterally with slight valgus heel and pronation. He was tender over the tarsal navicular bilaterally, but no excessive callous formation. He was found to have bilateral foot pain and pes planus. The CI waived a VA compensation and pension (C&P) examination and the VA rated the condition based on the service treatment records. The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The VA and PEB both coded the bilateral pes planus condition as 5276, acquired flat foot, and rated it at 10%. The VA noted that a 10% rating is awarded when the weight bearing line is over or medial to the great toe with inward bowing of the tendo-achillis and pain on manipulation and use of the feet. A higher, 30% rating is not warranted unless there is marked deformity, pain on manipulation and use (accentuated), swelling on use, and characteristic callouses. The CI did not meet the criteria for a 30% 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 bilateral anterior foot pain condition.


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 bilateral foot 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 recharacterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination, as follows:

UNFITTING CONDITION
 VASRD CODE RATING
Bilateral Foot Pain 5276 10%
COMBINED
 10%


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20130905, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record



                          
                                            XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , DAF
President
 Physical Disability Board of Review

SFMR-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 forXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20140005204 (PD201301197)


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                                                  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                                      Deputy Assistant Secretary
                                                      (Army Review Boards)

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 02512

    Original file (PD2013 02512.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The feetcondition, characterized as “ bilateral pes planus,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501.No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEBadjudicated “ chronic bilateral foot pain”as unfitting, rated 10%, with likely application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02199

    Original file (PD-2013-02199.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The CI appealed to the Formal PEB (FPEB), which conceded service aggravation, and rated the bilateral plantar fasciitis at 0%, citing criteria of the Veterans’ Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to be not unfitting (by the IPEB and FPEB). The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01675

    Original file (PD2012 01675.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Back pain, along with foot pain, was mentioned in a sick call note in 1999, although the entry elaborated only the foot complaint. An individual with a complaint of chronic low back pain, a normal objective examination, and normal objective testing is normally not referred...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01516

    Original file (PD2012 01516.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the bilateral foot conditionas unfitting, rated 10%with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining conditions were determined to meet retention standards. (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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01102

    Original file (PD2011-01102.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The PEB adjudicated the bilateral, plantar fasciitis and bilateral flat feet conditions as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the U.S. Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) pain policy. It noted the progression of the bilateral foot pain despite conservative treatment and limitation of activities; “currently, her feet still hurt and she is not doing any high impact activities but the pain is starting to increase.” The examination documented bilateral pes planus and tenderness on...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01985

    Original file (PD-2014-01985.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to the VASRD rules for rating the spine in effect at the time of separation thoracic and lumbar spine conditions coded IAW §4.71a are provided a single disability rating and thus the thoracic DDD and the lumbago (listed by the PEB as separate conditions) are subsumed in the §4.71a rating that follows. Since the disability due only to the left foot cannot be isolated by the clinical evidence or from the fitness implications of the bilateral condition, the Board consensus was that...

  • 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 | CY2013 | PD-2013-01298

    Original file (PD-2013-01298.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    CI CONTENTION : “I was found unfit for the Army for the medical condition Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis with slight pes planus. Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Bilateral Foot Pain with Plantar Fasciitis5399-53100%Bilateral Plantar Fasciitis with Slight Pes Planus and Slight Hallux Valgus5299-527610%20050110Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 9 (Not in Scope)20050110 Combined: 0%Combined: 20%*Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20050311 ( most proximate to date...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD 2011 00417

    Original file (PD 2011 00417.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Non tender, but pain with use §4.71a Rating 20 % (5271) 20 % (5271) 10 % (5271) 10 % (5271)The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB adjudicated the chronic bilateral ankle pain secondary to bilateral avascular necrosis of the talus and pes planus with application of VASRD § 4.14, avoidance of pyramiding as a single unfitting condition and assigned a disability rating of 20%, analogous to degenerative joint disease. The Board determined that...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00818

    Original file (PD2012 00818.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGSPHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEWNAME: BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army CASE NUMBER: PD1200818SEPARATION DATE: 20031021 At the C&P exam the CI had a normal gait and posture.The CI reported pain and stiffness standing and walking for more than thirty minutes but was employed in a retail store.The Board considered if the CI’s chronic right foot pain met the 10% rating of either 5022 or 5276 IAW VASRD §4.71a and concluded that it did not. SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical...