Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00096
Original file (PD 2014 00096.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX    CASE: PD-2014-00096
BRANCH OF SERVICE: MARINE CORPS  BOARD DATE: 20140812
SEPARATION DATE: 20071130


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty LCPL/E-3 (3051/Warehouse Clerk) medically separated for a chronic left knee condition. The left knee condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards. He was placed on limited duty and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). 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. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic knee pain” as unfitting, rated 20% with a 10% EPTS (existing prior to service) reduction. Status post (s/p) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) bone-patella-tendon bone reconstruction, left medial meniscus tear s/p medial meniscus repair and left Grade II chondromalacia patella were determined to be Category II conditions. The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “I was rated at 30% when I was discharged from the Marine Corps. Subsequently, the VA rated me at 40% for the same conditions.”


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 left knee condition is addressed below; and, no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The VA service-connected (lumbosacral strain, right ankle and cervical spine conditions) were not identified by the MEB/PEB and thus are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. Disability compensation may only be offered for those conditions that cut short the member’s career. 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 Naval Records.

IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making recommendations on correcting disability determinations. The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20071016 VA - (4 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Chronic Knee Pain 5299-5003 10% Traumatic Arthritis Left Knee, Status Post-Operative Changes 5260 10% 20080318
S/P Anterior Cruciate Ligament Bone-Patella-Tendon Bone Reconstruction CAT II
Left Medial Meniscus Tear, S/P Repair CAT II
Left Grade II Chondromalacia Patella CAT II
Other x 0 (Not in Scope) Other x 3
Rating: 10% Combined: 30%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 80429 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Left Knee Condition. Prior to military service, the CI underwent a left ACL reconstruction after a sports related injury in November 2004. He did well postoperatively with a return of full range-of-motion (ROM) within 5 months. Six months after service entry he re-injured his left knee while hiking. A magnetic resonance image dated January 2007 revealed normal post-surgical changes as well as a medial meniscal tear. Upon orthopedic recommendation, the CI underwent a left arthroscopic meniscal repair and patellar (knee cap) debridement in June 2007. Despite surgical correction, he continued to have left knee pain. A physical therapy (PT) encounter dated 3 August 2007 noted the CI endorsed “constant pain” scaled at 6/10; worse after prolonged standing and walking. The PT physical examination (PE) revealed a normal gait, the absence of atrophy or tenderness and minimal decreased ROM.

At the narrative summary examination of 30 August 2007 (3 months prior to separation), the CI reported left knee pain scaled at 7/10 while at rest. Additionally, he endorsed pain with kneeling, attempting full flexion and locking with attempts to run. His PE revealed joint-line and patellar tenderness, patellar grind and crepitus, and painful decreased ROM. His gait was antalgic. Instability tests were negative. His diagnosis was chondromalacia (Grade II) of the patella and s/p previously mentioned surgical procedures.

At the VA Compensation and Pension examination of 18 March 2008, (4 months after separation), the CI reported constant left knee pain scaled 8/10 associated with subjective weakness and stiffness. He reported the inability to walk greater than 10 minutes, play sports, lift weights or run. Pain increased with stair climbing. He denied dislocations, subluxations or instability of the knee. His PE revealed global tenderness about the left knee with patellar grind and crepitus present. Repetitive use increased his pain, but not weakness, fatigue or endurance. ROM was decreased. There was no guarding present and his gait was antalgic with a limp. The diagnosis was traumatic arthritis of the left knee. 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.

Left Knee ROM
(Degrees)		 MEB ~ 3 Mo. Pre-Sep
 VA C&P ~ 4 Mo. Post-Sep
Flexion (140 Normal) 115 105
Extension (0 Normal) - 0
Comment antalgic gait; crepitus; painful motion;
antalgic gait
§4.71a Rating 10% 10%
The Board directs attenti on to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence . After a 10% rating reduction for an EPTS condition, t he PEB assigned a 10% rating under an analogous 5003 code (degenerative arthritis). The VA also assigned a 10% rating under code 5260 (limited flexion ) citing painful motion with arthritic changes and surgical intervention. Although non-compensable limitation of motion was present near the time of separation, the MEB and VA examination s clearly indicated painful motion (§4.59) or pain on use ( functional loss; §4.40) secondary to decreased ROM and or the presence of crepitus . Board members agreed that a minimal compensable rating under either a specific joint code or an analogous 5003 code was therefore supported by application of §4.40. In this case, Board members could not completely ascertain the rationale of the PEB’s original analogous 20% rating given neither the presence of incapacitating episodes nor involvement of two or more joints . All m embers did agree that the totality of evidence in this case support ed a clear-cut rating of 10% as described above. A bsent effusion, meniscal removal or documented instability, there was no route to an impairment rating higher than the final 10% under any other applicable knee codes. 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 ’s adjudication for the left knee condition.

Other PEB Conditions. Left Grade II chondromalacia patella, left medial meniscus tear s/p repair and s/p ACL bone-patella-tendon bone reconstruction were all adjudicated by the PEB as related Category II conditions. The Board unanimously agrees that all of the conditions are related and included in the discussion above and therefore do not warrant consideration as separately unfitting conditions. All related symptoms and functional impairments are subsumed under the rating for the left knee as noted above.


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 left knee 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 20131227, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record





                 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
Physical Disability Board of Review



MEMORANDUM FOR DIRECTOR, SECRETARY OF THE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW
BOARDS

Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS

Ref: (a) DoDI 6040.44
(b) CORB ltr dtd 11 Mar 15

In accordance with reference (a), I have reviewed the cases forwarded by reference (b), and, for the reasons provided in their forwarding memorandums, approve the recommendations of the PDBR that the following individual’s records not be corrected to reflect a change in either characterization of separation or in the disability rating previously assigned by the Department of the Navy’s Physical Evaluation Board:
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USMC
- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN


                                                      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                            Assistant General Counsel
                                                      (Manpower & Reserve Affairs)

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00891

    Original file (PD2012-00891.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW Rating 10%* 10% Exam 20000325 20000325 BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY SEPARATION DATE: 20040302 NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX CASE NUMBER: PD1200891 BOARD DATE: 20130125 SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SPC E-4 (62E/Heavy Construction Equipment Operator), medically separated for right knee injury. There was no MEB ROM evaluation. Meniscal coding...

  • 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 | CY2012 | PD2012-00858

    Original file (PD2012-00858.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The conditions forwarded to the PEB were left knee medial meniscus tear and left knee patellar chondromalacia. The PEB adjudicated the left knee condition as not unfitting and recommended the CI was “Fit to Continue on Active Duty.” The CI requested a Records Review Panel reconsideration of his case and filed a 2 page statement outlining why “the findings are not compatible with the evidence provided and the condition I currently have.” The Records Review Panel agreed with the CI...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00023

    Original file (PD2010-00023.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Flexion (140⁰ normal)0-130⁰120⁰ (pain at 105⁰)Extension (0⁰ normal)-2⁰0⁰CommentPatellofemoral crepitusTenderness over knee medial worse than lateral; Positive patellar compression test§4.71a Rating10%10%At the time of the MEB exam on 2 November 2002, seven months prior to separation, the CI had severe left anterior knee pain which limited his activities of daily living. Negative testing included the McMurray test and tests for ligamentous instability; no effusion was noted and gait was...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00344

    Original file (PD-2014-00344.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20060405 Left Knee Condition . By the time of separation, the CI’s condition had improved such that he had a full ROM, albeit that knee pain persisted in spite of treatment.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00375

    Original file (PD-2014-00375.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. RATING COMPARISON : Service IPEB – Dated 20061023VA -(9 Months Pre-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Grade III/IV Chondromalacia, Left Knee5099-50030%Left Knee Chondromalacia of the...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00674

    Original file (PD2013 00674.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    At a VA examination, dated 10 June 2010, the CI complained that “the left knee pain and swelling had gotten worse since the left knee arthroscopic surgery.” The VA physician noted tenderness only “along the medial and lateral patellar facets,” but noted the absence of effusion or instability. Left foot pain condition. Right knee pain condition .The Board considered whether the right knee pain condition was unfitting for continued military service.

  • 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...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 00376

    Original file (PD 2014 00376.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The rating for the unfitting right knee is addressed below; no additional conditions (the contended left knee, arthritis, nerve damage, GERD and hiatal hernia) are not within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. The examiner opined that theCI’s history of prior knee surgery was most likely exacerbated by the fall.The MEB NARSUM physical exam findings are summarized in the chart below.The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam performed on 3 August 2005,10 months after separation,...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-01355

    Original file (PD-2012-01355.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Right Knee Pain Condition. The Board noted the PEB rated the knee condition using the code for knee instability (5257). The Board noted the MRI findings showing evidence of a deficient ACL and MEB NARSUM examination with a positive Lachman test graded 1+.