Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02035
Original file (PD-2014-02035.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX    CASE: PD-2014-02035
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141010
SEPARATION DATE: 20090223


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E-5 (Combat Engineer) medically separated for a low back condition. The condition 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 low back condition, characterized as “low back pain (LBP)” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. The MEB also identified and forwarded one other condition, “anxiety disorder” for PEB adjudication. The Informal PEB adjudicated “low back pain” as unfitting, rated 20% with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The anxiety disorder condition w as determined to be not unfitting . The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “Please consider all 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 when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the PEB, but determined to be not unfitting. Any conditions 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/Naval 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 Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (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.


RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20081112
 VA - (14 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Low Back Pain 5241 20% Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease 5243 10% 20100416
Anxiety Disorder Not Unfitting PTSD 9411 Deferred
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 2 (Deferred) 20100416
Combined: 20%
 Combined: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 20 120105 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).


ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Low Back Condition. While deployed in 2006, the CI lifted a stack of wood when he heard a “pop” in his low back and experienced excruciating pain in the same area. Initial radiology test revealed multi-level intervertebral disc bulging without nerve root or spinal nerve compression. He was medevac’d from the theater for definitive care. He underwent aggressive physical therapy (PT) and spinal steroid injections without symptom relief. A repeat set of radiology exams in March 2007 revealed new evidence of spinal nerve compression. Secondary to persistent and worsening pain coupled with new X-ray findings, the CI underwent a two-level lumbar disc replacement surgery on 23 July 2007. Despite “some” pain relief after surgery, a significant amount persisted throughout his career. He was permanently profiled on 30 July 2008, and sent for an MEB. At the narrative summary examination, performed on 17 September 2008, (4 months prior to separation) the CI reported constant “mid to lower back pain” that's “like someone's taken a vise” and additionally reported, “it's a slow pressure.” “I'm able to perform everything without any problems, but if I get to moving around too much, I get to hurting and need to take a break.” “I can walk 15 maybe 20 minutes before it starts hurting.” The physical examination (PE) noted “moderate range-of-motion (ROM) with flexion to approximately 90 degrees.” Bilateral lower extremity strength was normal. At the VA Compensation and Pension examination, performed on 16 April 2010 (14 months after separation) the CI reported only able to “tolerate sitting for approximately 10 to 15 minutes, standing for approximately 20 to 30 minutes and can lift weights between 5 to 10 lbs.” The PE noted lumbar tenderness and decreased ROM. 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.
Thoracolumbar ROM
(Degrees)		 MEB ~7 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20080730)
PT ~5 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20081003)
VA C&P ~14 Mo. Post-Sep
(20100416)
Flexion (90 Normal) 90 45 40
Extension (30) - 10 7
R Lat Flexion (30) 18 8
L Lat Flexion (30) 14 11
R Rotation (30) 20 12
L Rotation (30) 18 14
Combined (240) - 125 92
Comment tenderness - painful motion
§4.71a Rating 10% 20% 20%
invalid font number 31502
The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB coded the back condition under 5241 (spinal fusion) at 20% citing limited motion, whereas the VA rated 10% under 5243 (intervertebral disc syndrome) citing lumbar tenderness. All members agreed that the PT measured ROMs were the most complete and nearest to the time of separation for probative value assessment. Clearly, the thoracolumbar flexion of 45 degrees supports the 20% rating under the VASRD spine rules. Absent favorable ankylosis, the 40% threshold is not applicable in this case. 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 of the low back condition.

Anxiety Disorder. There was a single psychiatry entry in the service treatment record pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. On 19 February 2008 (12 months prior to separation), the CI was diagnosed with anxiety disorder secondary to a reported history of marital discord, and dreams about a friend who died in a tent fire. The examiner also listed “He sometimes has combat related nightmares,” but provided no further explanation. His mental status examination was normal excepting an “angry” mood. There was no further clinical MH follow-up in evidence. The Board’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB’s determination that the anxiety disorder was not unfitting. The Board’s threshold for countering fitness determinations is higher than the VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt) standard used for its rating recommendations, but remains adherent to the DoDI 6040.44 “fair and equitable” standard. All Board members agreed that despite an angry mood, the evidence of record reflected appropriate duty performance (as related to mental functioning) in the period of time leading into the MEB. AN MH condition was never profiled or implicated in the commander’s statement and was not judged to fail retention standards. The Board therefore concluded the MH condition of anxiety disorder was not unfitting at the time of separation and therefore, not subject to disability rating. 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 the anxiety disorder and so no additional disability rating is 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. 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 low back condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. In the matter of the contended anxiety disorder condition, the Board unanimously recommends no change from the PEB determination as not unfitting. 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.


The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20140509, w/atchs
Exhibit 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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150010555 (PD201402035)


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 | CY2014 | PD-2014-02739

    Original file (PD-2014-02739.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Pre-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Low Back Pain5299-523720%Lumbosacral Spine Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD)524320%20080221Adjustment DisorderNot Unfitting /Not CompensableAnxiety Disorder941310%20080304Adjustment Disorder9440NSC20080304HyperlipidemiaNot UnfittingNo VA PlacementOther x 0 (Not In Scope)Other x 3 RATING: 20%RATING: 30% *Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20080722(most proximate to date of separation [DOS]) Low Back Pain (LBP) . The...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01855

    Original file (PD-2014-01855.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 theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The PEB rated the chronic neck pain 0%, coded 5237 (cervical strain) and the VA rated it 20%.The Board considered that the CI was noted to have painful, mildly limited cervical ROM without noted muscle spasm at the MEB...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01075

    Original file (PD-2013-01075.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB also identified and forwarded one other condition.The Informal PEB adjudicated “chronic back pain due to lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), without neurologic abnormality”as unfitting, rated 10%,citing criteria of theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The remaining condition was determined to be not unfitting and therefore not rated. The rating for the unfitting lumbar spine condition and the above considerations for the MH condition are addressed...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02542

    Original file (PD-2013-02542.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 theVeterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The VA coded the knees separately at 5260, leg, limitation of flexion and assigned a disability rating of 10% for each knee. Providing a correction to the individual’s separation document showing that the individual...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02055

    Original file (PD-2014-02055.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    At an Orthopedic follow-up visit 7 March 2007 the CI reported bilateral anterior knee pain and the exam noted patellofemoral tenderness with full motion of both knees, without effusion or instability. In the matter of the bilateral knee condition the Board recommends disability rating as follows: an unfitting right knee condition, rated 10% and an unfitting left knee condition rated 0% both coded 5299-5260 IAW VASRD §4.71a.In the matter of the contended anxiety disorder condition, the Board...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01853

    Original file (PD-2014-01853.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The back condition, characterized as “non-radicular lower back pain with mild degenerative changes at L5-S1” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. 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. Post-Sep (20071207)Flexion (90...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00462

    Original file (PD2013 00462.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board noted the first VA C&P examination was well outside the 12-month time frame specified in DoDI 6040.44 regarding VA evaluations for Board consideration to have significant probative value in the Board’s rating recommendation, and the CI did indicate that his pain was “worse” further suggesting it did not reflect his condition at separation. Mental Health Review Contended MH Conditions .Although the CI elaborated no contention related to any MH condition, it is noted that he...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00775

    Original file (PD-2014-00775.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In addition, the CI was notified by the Army that his case may be eligible for review of the military disability evaluation of his mental health (MH) condition in accordance with Secretary of Defense directive for a comprehensive review of Service members who were referred to a disability evaluation process between 11 September 2001 and 30 April 2012 and whose MH diagnoses were changed during that process. No diagnosis of any MH condition was forwarded by the MEB or adjudicated by the PEB;...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01000

    Original file (PD-2014-01000.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.In addition, the Secretary of Defense Mental Health Review Terms of Reference directed a comprehensive review of Service members with certain mental health (MH) conditions referred to a disability evaluation process between 11 September 2001 and 30 April 2012 that were changed or eliminated...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01384

    Original file (PD-2013-01384.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The retention people said he needs to get … an MEB for that so he is here.”On examination, ROM of the back was “normal.” Gait was normal. Straight leg raising was “minimal on the left.”The surgeon recommended a P2 profile for his low back and recommended treatment.Follow-up orthopedic examination on 14March 2005 noted CI complaint of back pain radiating into both legs and to the toes. The Board also noted there was no reported intervening injury prior to the post separation VA examination...