DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX ORE
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 Docket No. 00602-09
23 November 2009
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 12 November 2009. 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.
The Board found that you appeared before a medical evaluation
board ({MEB) on 17 November 2006. The report of that board
indicates, in part, that you had a history of bilateral femoral
stress fractures in April 2005, and that you were seen by a
podiatrist during June 2006 and given a diagnosis of bilateral
metatarsalgia (pain in the foot in the metatarsal area just
‘before the toes) and bilateral gastroc equinus (tight calf
muscles). The MEB established final diagnoses of metatarsalgia
and gastroc equinus and recommended that your case be reviewed
by the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). On 19 December 2006,
after being advised of the findings and recommendation of the
MEB, you declined to submit a statement in rebuttal thereto. On
28 December 2006, the PEB made preliminary findings that you
were unfit for duty because of bilateral metatarsalgia, which
was ratable at 20 percent, and bilateral gastroc equinus, which
was classified as a related category 2 diagnosis. On 17 January
2007, you accepted those findings, and stated that you intended
to request that you be retained on active duty in a limited duty
status until 10 June 2007. Thereafter, an official of the PEB
recommended that you be granted continuation on active duty
until 1 June 2007. You were honorably discharged from the Marine
Corps on 8 May 2007, in accordance with the approved findings of
the PEB, with a combined rating of 20%. On 21 May 2007, the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you separate
disability ratings of 10 percent for ten conditions, as follows:
left and right wrist strain, status-post stress fracture right
and left femorai neck, right thumb and index finger strain,
patellofemoral syndrome, right knee, osteoarthritis of the
thoracolumbar spine, tinnitus, and bilateral metatarsalgia. You
received a combined disability rating of 70 percent and
entitlement to monthly compensation in the amount of $1,401.00,
for the ten conditions.
The Board concluded that your receipt of disability ratings from
the VA for eight conditions that were not rated by the PEB is
not considered probative of the existence of error or injustice
in your naval record, because the VA awarded those ratings
without regard to the issue of your fitness for military duty as
of 8 May 2007, when you were released from active duty and
discharged. It concluded that that those conditions were
productive of no more than mild impairment.
In the absence of evidence which demonstrates that the
conditions of your femurs rendered you unfit to reasonably
perform the duties of your office, grade, rank or rating by
reason of physical disability your discharge, the Board was
unable to recommend any corrective action in your case.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names 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 to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequentiy, 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,
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD-2012-00083
The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated the bilateral metatarsalgia condition as unfitting, rated 10% for each foot with application of the bilateral factor for a combined 20%, with application of the Veteran’s Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Thiscondition was noted in the NARSUM and MEB and was clinically tied to the CI’s bilateral unfitting foot condition(s). Physical Disability Board of Review
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00755
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW Right Foot Condition. Physical Disability Board of Review
AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02563
Right Foot/Lower ExtremityCondition (Heel Spur, Plantar Fasciitis, Hammer Toe,Achilles and Gastroc-Soleus Tendinitis) .The service treatment record (STR) contains a routine exam entry from 1997 (same year as enlistment) documenting hallux valgus (bunion deformity of the big toe); and, a clinic note from the same year noting a 4-month history of bilateral foot pain. The PEB rated the right foot condition analogously under 5279 (metatarsalgia) which provides for a maximum rating of 10%, under...
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00547
The Board considered this evaluation in determining the CI’s condition at the time of separation from service. While the VASRD code 5276 could be used analogously, it appears that the malunion of the metatarsal fractures with subsequent pain, arthritis, and painful motion of the right foot and ankle as well as the inability to perform or sustain prolonged or exertional activities are the conditions that limited the CI’s ability to perform the required duties of his rank and rating. The CI...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00045
The Board considered rating the left ankle degeneration separately, but determined the rear-foot pain was best considered as degenerative changes of the left rear foot which also contributed to the limitation of ankle motion from the plantar fasciitis. The Board recommends no additional separately unfitting foot or ankle condition, or change in the PEB adjudications other than PF, and all symptoms were considered under the separate 5399-5310 coding ratings above. Exhibit C. Department of...
AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01894
CI CONTENTION : “Medical Board combined Right and Left conditions as one and left off pes planus from diagnostic evaluation. All members agreed, however, that separate ratings (unilateral or bilateral) under separate codes was not compliant with VASRD §4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding), which specifies that “the evaluation of the same manifestation under different diagnoses are to be avoided.” Specifically a separate compensable rating for pes planus, as contended by the CI and conferred by...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01101
An additional combined condition, “secondary low back and bilateral knee pain” was forwarded as “not boardable.” The PEB (via an Informal Reconsideration following an appeal) conceded aggravation of the congenital podiatric conditions; and, consolidated three of the MEB submitted conditions (as specified in the PEB’s DA Form 199 language quoted below) as a single unfitting condition characterized as “Painful feet on [sic] ankles due to plantar fasciitis and posterior tibial tendonitis with...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-01176
The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated the chronic right foot pain due to Morton’s neuroma condition as unfitting, rated 10%, with application of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Although there were examination findings of hallux valgus and hammer toes (single toes) there were no symptoms or impairment attributed to these abnormalities that would warrant rating under VASRD codes 5280 or 5282, and, if rated using these codes, would not attain a minimum...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00370
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW The physical exam indicated tenderness to the lower thoracic spine and left paraspinals muscles and the ROM was limited by pain. With application of the VASRD notes, the CI’s combined ROM was 225° for the military ROM exam.
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00599
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6044.40, however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions for disability at the time of separation. The PEB adjudicated the foot condition as chronic foot pain secondary to stress fractures and plantar fasciitis under code 5279 metatarsalgia at 10 % disability rating, the only rating under this code.