RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2015-00746
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Navy 	SEPARATION DATE:  20070622

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Electronic Technician, medically separated for “bilateral epididymal pain” with a disability rating of 10%.  

CI CONTENTION:  “Did not receive a rating for my chronic pain.”  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 upon a 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 - 20070130	VARD – 20081217	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Bilateral Epididymal Pain	7525	10%	Chronic Testalgia,/Epididymitis	7599-7525	0%	20080925	
Chronic Testalgia, Bilateral	Category 2					
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  20%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Bilateral Epididymal Pain.  According to service treatment record (STR) and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s bilateral testicle pain began in August 2005.  Ultrasound evaluation revealed bilateral hydroceles (fluid on testes) which resolved.  Despite pain management, the CI continued to report right greater than left testicular pain.  The MEB forwarded orchitis and epididymitis, unspecified” and “unspecified disorder of male genital organs” for PEB adjudication.  At the MEB examination dated December 2006, 6 months prior to separation, the CI reported bilateral scrotal pain.  

The MEB NARSUM examination on 15 December 2005, 6 months prior to separation, noted complaints of bilateral testicular pain.  There was no history of trauma, sexually transmitted diseases, infection or known etiology of the pain.  The physical examination (PE) revealed mild tenderness about the scrotum, left side greater than right.  There were no inguinal hernias.  At the 25 September 2008 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) evaluation, performed 15 months after separation, the CI reported having continued scrotal pain.  The PE revealed bilateral testicular tenderness.  The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  

The PEB rated the bilateral epididymal pain condition at 10%, coded 7525 (epididymo-orchitis). The PEB also determined the chronic bilateral testalgia was a related Category II condition.  The VA analogously rated the testalgia/epididymitis condition 0% coded 7525, based on the VA C&P examination 15 months after separation, citing no evidence of long-term drug therapy, one or two hospitalizations per year or intermittent intensive management.  The Navy PEB’s Category II diagnosis of chronic bilateral testalgia was intrinsic to the rated condition and a separate rating cannot be supported without pyramiding (VASRD §4.14); thus, it is appropriately subsumed in the epididymal pain condition.  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’s adjudication for the bilateral epididymal/scrotal pain condition.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the bilateral epididymal pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.115a, 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 20150604, 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 14 Nov 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:

		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN
		- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, former USN

						  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
	     				  Assistant General Counsel
						  (Manpower & Reserve Affairs)