RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2017-02717
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Army 	SEPARATION DATE:  20080707

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E7, Human Resources Specialist, medically separated for “degenerative arthritis of the [neck]” with a disability rating of 10%.  

CI CONTENTION:  In addition to the back conditions, the CI requested review of additional conditions not identified by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  The 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 PEB to be unfitting for continued military service, and when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the MEB, but determined by the PEB 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.  The panel’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections when appropriate.  The panel’s assessment of the PEB rating determination is based on review of medical records and all available evidence relevant to application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards for 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, which operates 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 disability at the time of separation.  

RATING COMPARISON:  

SERVICE PEB - 20080411	VARD - NA	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Degenerative Arthritis of the Neck	5242	10%	No VA Examination Proximate to Separation in Evidence	
Low Back Pain	Not Unfitting		
COMBINED RATING:  10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  NA	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Degenerative Arthritis of the Neck.  According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s neck condition began in January 2005 while doing sit-ups.  Electrodiagnostic studies suggested disk herniation at C6-C7.  At the 25 October 2007 primary care clinic examination, the CI reported continued neck pain, worse with lateral and rotational movements.  Physical examination showed normal gait and cervical spine appearance, but there was tenderness and neck pain with rotation and lateral bending.  During the 16 November 2007 physical therapy examination, the CI reported chronic neck pain radiating to the bilateral upper extremities.  Physical examination showed normal gait without spasm, but there was tenderness.  Cervical range of motion (ROM) testing showed decreased flexion (within four fingers of the chest), extension and right greater than left rotation.  

The 4 March 2008 MEB NARSUM examination, 4 months prior to separation, noted complaints of constant, tension type, 5/10 neck pain.  Physical examination showed mild tenderness, but no spasm or deformity of the neck.  Cervical ROM testing, after repetition, showed flexion of 45 degrees (normal) and combined ROM of 300 degrees (normal 340).  Painful motion was noted.  There was no VA examination proximate to separation in evidence.  

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The PEB rated the neck condition 10%, coded 5242 (degenerative arthritis of the spine), citing combined range of motion of 315 degrees, no spasm and mild tenderness.  The panel agreed that a 10% rating, but no higher, was justified for limitation of combined ROM (greater than 170 degrees but not greater than 335 degrees), as reported on the MEB NARSUM examination proximate to separation.  There was no muscle spasm or guarding severe enough to result in an abnormal gait or spinal contour, thus the next higher 20% rating was not justified on this basis.  There was no documentation of incapacitating episodes due to intervertebral disc syndrome which would provide for a higher rating under that formula.  After due deliberation, considering all the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the panel concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the neck condition.  

Contended PEB Condition:  Low Back Pain.  The panel’s main charge is to assess the fairness of the PEB determination that the contended condition was not unfitting.  The contended condition was not profiled or implicated in the commander’s statement and did not fail retention standards.  There was no performance-based evidence from the record that the condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance at separation.  After due deliberation, the panel concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the contended condition, so no additional disability rating is recommended.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the neck condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the panel recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  In the matter of the contended back condition, the panel recommends no change from the PEB determination as not unfitting.  There are no other conditions within the panel’s scope of review for consideration.  Therefore, the panel recommends no modification or re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.  

The following documentary evidence was considered:  

Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20170305, w/atchs  
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record  
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Record  

AR20190007091, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:

	The Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) reviewed your application and found your separation disability rating and your separation from the Army for disability with severance pay to be accurate.  I have reviewed the Board’s recommendation and record of proceedings (copy enclosed), and I accept its recommendation.  I regret to inform you that your application to the DoD PDBR is denied.  

	This decision is final.  Recourse within the Department of Defense or the Department of the Army is exhausted; however, you have the option to seek relief by filing suit in a court of appropriate jurisdiction.