RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2014-00739
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Navy 	SEPARATION DATE:  20051118

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E5, H-60 Systems Organizational Initial Maintenance Technician, medically separated for “left lower quadrant surgical incision pain…,” with a  disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION:  The CI contends she was diagnosed with Crones and a bilateral knee condition as well as other medical problems while on active duty.  She also asserts her rating decreased.  The CI’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.   

SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44.  It is limited to those conditions determined by the Physical Evaluation Board (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 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 based on 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 PEB - 20051005	VARD - 20060603	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Left Lower Quadrant Surgical Incision Pain	7804	10%	Abdominal Scar with Revision	7804	10%	20060516	
			Right Femoral Polyneuropathy Due to B12 Deficiency	8699-8620	10%		
			Left Sciatica	8620	10%		
			Left Ilioinguial Neuritis	8630	10%		
COMBINED RATING:  10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  60%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Surgical Incision Pain.  According to service treatment record and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary, the CI’s pain condition began after recovery from an emergent cesarean section performed in April 2004.  Despite local incisional anesthetic injections, her pain progressed causing limitations in physical activity.  A surgical scar revision was performed in March 2005 which did not resolve her painful symptoms.  At the MEB examination (recorded on DD Form 2807 and 2808) dated September 2005, 2 months prior to separation, the CI reported continued left-sided pelvic pain.  The physical examination (PE) noted her lower abdominal scar without further objective description.  

At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination in May 2006, performed 6 months after separation, the CI reported a constant left-sided groin pain that extended down her inner thigh into the genital area and was aggravated with bending, stooping, coughing, lifting, and twisting.  Her PE revealed normal and varied sensation about the upper portion of her lower extremities.  There was significant tenderness about the left side of the prior surgical incision on the lower abdomen.     

The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  Both the PEB and VA coded and rated the pain condition at 10% coded 7804 (scars; unstable or painful).  All Board members agreed that the cesarean surgical scar was the single scar in consideration and therefore, the sole rating of 10% is supported under 7804 as a painful single scar.  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 for the left-sided surgical incision pain condition.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the surgical scar pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.118 the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.  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 20131029, w/atchs
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record

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 21 Jun 16

      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:

		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN

						 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
	     				  	Assistant General Counsel
						(Manpower & Reserve Affairs)