Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
Mr. Lee Cates | Analyst |
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member | |
Mr. Ronald J. Weaver | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he should be retired or separated by reason of physical disability.
APPLICANT STATES: The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) reached a decision that was factually, logically and equitably wrong and reads like an Orwellian novel. A 40 to 60 percent disability rating should be awarded. The applicant further defers to counsel.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: That the applicant had microdiscectomy surgery at L4-L5, at age 16, in 1990. In October 1991, he applied to the United States Military Academy (USMA) and was automatically rejected because of a history of back surgery, but subsequently was accepted with a medical waiver granted by the Department of Defense Medical Examiner Review Board as shown at Exhibit A. In June 1996, he graduated from the USMA. He was pain free until January 1998, when he began experiencing new left radicular pain symptoms. In April 1998, he underwent another procedure on the L4-L5 Disc. On 21 January 1999, a PEB denied his request for disability benefits. He appealed and the PEB affirmed its original findings. On 4 May 1999, the Physical Disability Agency affirmed the decisions of the PEB as clarified and shown at Exhibit I. Counsel makes four points concerning the PEB: (1) The PEB ignored the presumption of service aggravation of the applicant’s disability. (2) The PEB ignored the regulation requiring all reasonable doubt to be resolved in the applicant’s favor. (3) The PEB ignored the testimony of its own doctor. (4) Recently discovered medical evidence warrants a new hearing. Counsel provided a 10 page dissertation with exhibits A through K and a statement from a civilian physician, dated 19 April 2002, indicating he had found a fracture of the inferior facet at L4 on the left and that, in his opinion, it had occurred in and around the year 1998.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's available military and medical records show:
On 27 December 1991, the Surgeon, USMA recommended that the admissions committee grant a medical waiver for his history of HNP (herniated nucleus pulposus).
On 1 June 1996, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant, Ordnance Corps and entered on active duty from the USMA. He was promoted to first lieutenant on 16 April 1998.
The Medical Evaluation Board (MEBD) proceedings, Narrative Summary (NARSUM) and other formal proceedings are not a matter of record and were not provided by counsel.
On 21 January 1999, in a memorandum, the Assistant Chief, Neurosurgery Service, Madigan Army Medical Center, Tacoma, Washington indicates “I believe 1LT Schepflin has experienced worsening of his lumbar disease to a degree that exceeds the normal progression. As his only significant activity has been military related, the conclusion that his present condition is not service aggravated is incorrect.”
On 28 January 1999, Formal PEB proceedings indicate a disability of refractory lumbar radiculopathy, left. “Medical history indicates [he] had a microdiscectomy L5 (left) in 1990, subsequent to which [he] received a waiver to enter [the] USMA and then commissioning on graduation. In Jan 98 [he] began to experience recurrence of left radicular symptoms without specific aggravating trauma or incident. [He] U[u]nderwent repeat foraminotomy and discectomy of a subannular disc bulge, but now with persisting left L5 radiculopathy manifested by slight weakness of extensor hallicus (sic) longus and pinprick suppression in L5 distribution.” The condition listed as medical board diagnosis #2 (unidentified) was considered by the PEB and found to be not unfitting and therefore not ratable. The PEB found his unfitting condition to be not service incurred or permanently aggravated. It was recommended he be separated without disability benefits.
On 8 February 1999, the applicant indicated he did not concur with the findings and recommendations of his formal hearing.
On 19 February 1999, the PEB responded to his 8 February 1999 non-concurrence and indicated that his entire case, including his rebuttal, was being forwarded to the US Army Physical Disability Agency for further processing and that he could provide to that agency any further additional evidence that he might acquire.
On 29 April 1999, revised PEB proceedings indicate that the 28 January 1999 PEB was upheld.
On 4 May 1999, the PEB responded to the applicant’s rebuttal to the PEB findings. It was indicated that all of his comments and evidence were carefully considered, but they adhered to the findings of the case.
Although not a matter of record, the applicant indicated he was honorably discharged on 23 June 1999, based on physical disability without benefits. There is no evidence of record that he has been subsequently rated by the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Title 10, United States Code, section 1201, provides for the physical disability retirement of a member who has at least 20 years of service or a disability rated at least 30 percent.
This Board operates under the standard of presumption of regularity in governmental affairs. The standard states, in effect, that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume that all actions taken by the military were proper.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The evidence in this case does not support his contention that there was an error or injustice in his separation from active duty. The Board presumes he was properly separated and that there is nothing in the records or in the evidence submitted by the applicant that overcomes this presumption.
2. Notwithstanding the 21 January 1999 memorandum from the Assistant Chief, Neurosurgery Service, Madigan Army Medical Center available evidence shows the applicant’s disability existed prior to service, was not service aggravated, and that he is not eligible for physical disability compensation from the Army.
3. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
_MHM___ _RJW___ _CLG____ DENY APPLICATION
CASE ID | AR2002072867 |
SUFFIX | |
RECON | |
DATE BOARDED | 20030204 |
TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
DISCHARGE REASON | |
BOARD DECISION | DENY |
REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
ISSUES 1. | |
2. | |
3. | |
4. | |
5. | |
6. |
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00525
CI CONTENTION : The CI states: ‘VA rated disability at 40% Service connection on May 28, 1997 and considered me unemployable on 4-22-04 for the back condition military discharged me with at 10%. Follow-up for back pain. The frequency and severity of the CI’s back pain and radicular pain increased significantly during his time on TDRL and this was consistent with the increasing severity of degenerative disc disease and herniated discs with impingement on the right S1 nerve root documented...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00823
However both the NARSUM and the treatment record document the radicular pain and weakness continued at the same level of severity after the second surgery and at least until the time of the MEB NARSUM in April 2006. Service Treatment Record Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record VASRD CODE RATING 20% 10% 30% 5243 8620 COMBINED XXXXXXXXXXXXX, DAF President Physical Disability Board of Review 6 PD1100823 SFMR‐RB MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01650
The CI experienced idiopathic low back pain (LBP) in 2000. The low back condition, characterized as “status post (S/P) right L4/S1 microdiscectomy” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The PEB adjudicated “status post right L4/S1 microdiscectomy” as unfitting, rated 20%with likely application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals, and was medically separatedwith 20% disability...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01018
LBP due to DDD S/P Microdiscectomy and Fusion L5-S1 Condition .The CI underwent the following surgeries:1. Two days later the primary care provider noted significant lumbar muscle spasm, tightness, left straight leg raising significantly restricted and decreased reflex of the left lower extremity. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01972
There are no additional examinations available for review until a 16 December 2010 pre-operative examination for the previously recommended fusion, over 3 years after separation. It was determined that this represented natural progression of the disease and it was noted that the CI had been recommended to have this surgery in 2006 by the first neurosurgeon and advised by the second, who did the microdiscectomy in 2007, that she might still need the fusion at a later date.The Board then...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01718
Pre-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Chronic Mechanical Low Back Pain w/Residual Left Leg Pain5299-529510%Recurrent Central Disc Protrusion, Chronic Low Back Pain, and Intermittent Radiculopathy Status Post L4-5 Microdiscectomy529320%20010709Other x 0 (Not in Scope)Other x 0 Combined: 10%Combined: 20%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20010925 ( most proximate to date of separation [DOS]). BOARD FINDINGS : IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01838
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 CI had additional spine surgery in 2006 and subsequent left lower extremity peripheral nerve rating in 2008 and additional spine surgery in 2009. I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 01909
The left leg condition, characterized as “post-surgical S1 nerve root impingement causing radiculopathy with weakness in left leg and foot” by the MEB, was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AFI 48-123. The Board directed attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB adjudicated the left S1 radiculopathy secondary to L5-S1disk herniation status-post left L5 hemilaminectomy and L5-S1 micro-diskectomy condition as unfitting with a disability...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00004
The PEBs rated the CI’s back condition 10% based on the NARSUM and service records in evidence at the time (flexion to 80°, normal strength, normal gait), while the VA’s 20% rating at the time of separation was additionally based on the January 2006 neurosurgery note documenting an antalgic gait (20% for muscle spasm, severe enough to alter gait). The Board considered whether the CI’s radiculopathy was separately unfitting, warranting a disability rating at the time of separation. ...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00160
The CI was referred to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and was found unfit for continued military service due to low back pain, neck pain and shoulder pain. The low back pain and neck pain were rated 10% each and the left shoulder pain was rated 0%. without having pain.