RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2015-02298
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Air Force 	SEPARATION DATE:  20070531

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E2, Basic Airman, medically separated for “residual pain s/p right inguinal hernia repair” with a disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION:  The CI contends that he should be rated higher due to the 3 surgeries of which one he claims was to repair a mistake from a previous surgery.  The CI’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.  

SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The panel’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44.  It is limited to review of disability ratings assigned 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 or non-compensable.  Any conditions outside the panel’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 panel’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections, where appropriate.  The panel’s assessment of the PEB rating determination 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(s) at the time of separation.  The panel 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 panel 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 - 20070518	VARD - 20071119	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Residual Pain S/P RIH…	7804	10%	Residuals RIH…	7338	0%	20071018	
COMBINED RATING:  10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  0%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Residual Pain, Status Post (S/P) Right Inguinal Hernia (RIH) Repair.  According to service treatment records (STR) and the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI underwent excision of a right epididymal cyst in 2005 prior to accession.  This was disclosed on the entrance history.  He then entered active duty on 6 February 2007.  On 15 February 2007, 9 days after accession, he was evaluated in trainee health and reported chronic right sided testicular pain since his surgery.  The right testis and spermatic cord were swollen and tender on examination.  He was treated with medications and duty restrictions.  He was also referred to urology.  He was next seen on 21 February 2007, in the emergency room, and reported right groin pain.  He was found to have a reducible right inguinal hernia and referred to general surgery.  He then underwent surgical repair.  At the 2 week follow up on 8 March 2007, he was doing well and placed on convalescent leave from 15 March to 14 April 2007.  He was seen in follow up in general surgery on 24 April 2007 (this note is not in evidence) and noted to be doing well.  The incision was well healed, but surrounded by thick fibrous tissue.  It was determined that he would need several more months of healing before he could return to basic training and an MEB was recommended.  The MEB forwarded RIH S/P repair for PEB adjudication.  

At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) general and gastro-intestinal evaluations performed on 18 October 2007, 5 months after separation, the CI reported ongoing tenderness, especially with activity.  On examination, he was noted to have mild tenderness and was “well healed without evidence of recurrence.”  He had not yet found employment since separation.  

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The PEB rated the residual pain S/P RIH repair condition 10%, coded 7804 (unstable or painful scar).  The VA rated the residuals RIH repair condition 0% coded 7338 (inguinal hernia), based on the VA C&P examination5 months after separation, noting no evidence of a residual hernia.  After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the panel concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the residual pain RIH repair condition.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the residual pain S/P RIH repair condition and IAW VASRD §4.114, the panel unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  There were no other conditions within the panel’s scope of review for consideration.  The panel, 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 20150818, w/atchs
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record

SAF/MRB
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews, MD  20762

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:

Reference your application submitted under the provisions of DoDI 6040.44 (Section 1554, 10 USC), PDBR Case Number PD-2015-02298.

After careful consideration of your application and treatment records, the Physical Disability Board of Review determined that the rating assigned at the time of final disposition of your disability evaluation system processing was appropriate.  The Board recommended no re-characterization or modification of your separation.

I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the recommendation of the Board.  I concur with that finding and their conclusion that re-characterization of your separation is not warranted.  I accept their recommendation that your application be denied.

Sincerely,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Record of Proceedings