DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
JRE
Docket No: 4234-00
3 July 2001
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the
provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive
session, considered your application on 21 June 2001. Your allegations of error and injustice
were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the
proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your
application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and
applicable statutes, regulations and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the
evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice. In this connection, the Board substantially concurred with the enclosed rationale of
the hearing panel of the Physical Evaluation Board which rated your disabilities at a
combined rating of 40% for bilateral knee conditions. It was not persuaded that you suffered
from an unfitting back condition at the time of your transfer to the Temporary Disability
Retired List, or that the final rating assigned by the Physical Evaluation Board for your left
knee condition is incorrect. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The riames and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be
taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new
and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this
regard, it is important td keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official
records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the
burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
Enclosure
RATIONALE .
ene . : ~
ie. a 37 year old male with over 14 years of military
service who wes placed on the TDRL in September 4986 with the
diagnosis of (1) Degenerative Joint Disease of the Left Knee,
ratable under VA Code 5Q03 at 20%, and (2) Degenerative Joint
Disesse of the Left Wrist, ratable under YA Code 5003 at 10Z,for
a combined rating of 28% which is 302. e menber's most recent
evaluation was in April 1991 and based on this the Record Review
Panel ‘found the menber permanently unfit with the same ratings,
The member has appealed snd has requeated a 302 rating for his
wrists under VA Code 5214, and a 302 rating for his left knee
under VA Code 5257.
The member ais right handed, The medical record notes and
testimony confirms severel injuries to hia left wrist which
resulted in multiple operations, Tt was finally decided, once he
was-splaced on the TDRL, that the left wrist should be fused but
it required 3 operations until successful fusion was completed.
The last “fusion took place in 1989. Oh examination at the
hearing the menber's wrist is fused vin, tssentially neutral
posirion- at O degrees: he has no dorsiflexion, no plantar
flexion. He does have good pronation a'nd supination of the
forearm bilaterally. | The Panel considers. that this wrist. is
rateable under VA Code/"5214 at a 30% level. It is the "minor"
wrist. It does not fit the "favorable" position defined by the
A WAS Re or by the DEM (in its Special instruction and explanatory
notes on the VASRD) nor is it in an "unfavorable" position a6
defined by the VASRD. . 7
The left knee has also Sustained multiple injuries as noted in
his -record. The member has had multiple arthroscopic
examinations and operations on his menisci, both medially and
laterally, and has been diagnosed as having degenerstivé joint’
disease. The member testifies that he has difficulties with the
‘knee, that it goes out at ‘times, and at other times it locks up
end he requires ascistance to move, He is limited in how. far che
can go and, he does not climb on machinery at his work. He has a
variety of knee braces one of which he wears all the time. He
testifies, and Board exhibits indicate, that the member has been
selected for ‘a total knee replacement in Spite of, the fact that
he*is-young. - The member testified that he would.opt for a knee
replacement rather than a*fusion at this time although he igs
awaze that he would probably have one further replacement of the
knee, and may ‘require a fusion in the future, On examination'‘at
the- hearing the member has a range of motion of 0 degrees to
greater than 90 degrees. ~ This is full extension which was not
recorded by: the TDRi. On examination we’ could not detect
“inetability in the form of Lachman's or ‘anterior drawer or. on
"varus or valgus stress. The Panel considers that the member is
. Mot ratabie under VA -Code 5257 tek ate Gee nor, under
mitation of motion,
ak
either VA‘ Code 5261 or 5260 which are
{
. ..
oy , : +
Therefore the Panel would continue to rate the left knee under VA \
ee ge nee ere rere ienirmeaeny rains!
Mets Code 5003. ;
The Panel fibda that the mesber is permanently. unfit for military oo,
- service because of (1) Degeherstive Joint Disesse of the Left ,
" , Knee, ratable under VA Code 5003 at 20%, .and (2) Degenerative |. ° t
i Joint Disease of the Left Wrist, retable under VA Code 5214 at : i
30%, ‘for e Combined rating of 44% (whith tf 402.
‘ ” awe
,
. . ;
. -
< . ‘
‘ ; ‘ Se -
x .
. ‘ e
: ’
. 3
‘ . ‘
se : .
"oe . aa
an .
a “a
Sas
:
uv a
wet ,
a
- .
= } the.
: ~
’
. s m
’ i 7 , ‘
. “
. . = CoE ;
: ; mA Boe ~
. . Food
: . ane
? tae f ‘ a,
: , L. , ee :
m . ene sf
F '
4 >
, j °
' p
.
: 4 t . o
v
‘
‘
.
: . ’
- .
- 4
. t
iw
a sa t
+ . r Ps
} :
: i :
e = ab
i
‘
os .
’ ° ;
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02504
No other conditions were submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “degenerative arthrosis, left wrist, status post left total wrist fusion”as unfitting, rated 20%,citing criteria of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).The CI made no appeals and was medically separated. The Board directs attention to its rating recommendationbased on the above evidence.The PEB and VA both rated the left wrist condition at 20% using code 5214 (wrist ankylosis) as in a favorable position...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00360
Left Wrist Condition. The Board therefore has no reasonable basis for recommending any additional unfitting conditions for separation rating. In the matter of the right knee pain, right ankle pain, and left knee pain conditions or any other medical conditions eligible for Board consideration, the Board unanimously agrees that it cannot recommend any findings of unfit for additional rating at separation.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00054
The medical basis for the separation was chronic low back pain (LBP) and multiple painful joints (Bilateral degenerative joint disease [DJD] of hips and knees as well as the left ankle) without any history of trauma. NARSUM (date 20020917): CHIEF COMPLAINT: This is a 26-year-old male with two-year history of bilateral shoulder pain, back pain, bilateral hip pain, bilateral knee pain left greater than right, and left ankle pain. The MEB diagnosis #1 (Medically Unacceptable) described...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012-00335
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the right wrist condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The commander noted on 19 January 2007, 4 months prior to separation, that the duty performance of the CI was superb and only noted the wrist as duty limiting. Using the VA rating code 5003 as the Board did in this case, does not fully account for the severity of the CI’s functional loss.
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00941
The PEB adjudicated “pain left ankle and right wrist” as a single unfitting condition, rated 0% and “fusion of distal interphalangeal joint of the left non-dominant ring finger” as unfitting, rated 0%, with application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Pre-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Pain Left (this should be right)Ankle and Right Wrist5099-50030%Right Ankle Fracture5010-527110%*19990626Right Wrist, Residuals, status post (s/p)...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00386
Right Knee Condition . The Board considered that the MEB’s “7mm free body” (right knee) condition is considered in the overall knee ratings and is not separately ratable. Other Conditions .
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00893
The VA examination noted that the position of fusion was about 10degrees dorsiflexion. At the time of surgery, the fusion was measured at 15-20 degrees dorsiflexion. The Category II conditions that contributed to the unfit condition were “status post left wrist arthrodesis w/left distal ulna resection secondary to prior distal radius fractures and radiocarpal and distal radial ulnar joint arthrosis” and “diffuse upper left extremity paresthesias secondary to axillary bloc.” The Category...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01022
The Board’s role is confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB disability ratings and fitness determinations as elaborated above. Painful motion was documented at both the MEB and VA examinations. 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 urinary retention condition; thus no additional...
AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-00094
SEPARATION DATE: 20040322 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. 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...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00288
“Chronic right wrist pain” and “limited right wrist range of motion” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) as separate medically unacceptable conditions IAW AR 40-501. Right Wrist Condition . Wrist joint ROMs were markedly limited as charted above; but, the examiner documented normal pronation and supination of the forearm.