RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2017-03318
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Air Force 	SEPARATION DATE:  20070827

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Ground Radar Systems Journeyman, medically separated for “chronic low back pain with radiculopathy” with a disability rating of 10%.  

CI CONTENTION:  Should have been rated at least 60%.  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 Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) to be unfitting for continued military service, and when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the Medical Evaluation Board (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 - 20070628	VARD - 20080131	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Chronic Low Back Pain with Radiculopathy…	5243	10%	Status Post Lumbar Spine Laminectomy/Diskectomy…	5242	10%	20070510	
COMBINED RATING:  10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  10%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Chronic Low Back Pain with Radiculopathy.  According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI underwent back surgery in November 2006.  The 31 August 2006 MEB NARSUM examination, 12 months prior to separation, noted complaints of low back pain.  Physical examination showed a normal gait.  There was mild tenderness and mild spasm.  Strength was 5/5 and coordination was normal.  Straight leg raise test was negative.  Thoracolumbar range of motion (ROM) showed forward bend range was decreased and side to side range was full.  No measurements were recorded.  

The 27 December 2006 MEB NARSUM addendum examination, 8 months prior to separation, noted complaints of low back pain (2/10) and mild intermittent discomfort in his right leg.  He was not taking any pain medication.  Physical examination showed a normal gait and there was no tenderness.  Strength was 5/5 in the lower extremities, bilaterally.  Straight leg raise test was negative and the sensory examination was intact.  Coordination was normal.  Thoracolumbar ROM showed side to side and forward bend measurements were full.  Numerical values were not provided.  

At the 10 May 2007 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, 3 months before separation, the CI reported persistent back pain and intermittent right lower extremity pain.  The CI had no prescribed bedrest or incapacitating episodes over the past 12 months.  Physical examination showed gait and posture were normal.  Slight lumbar tenderness was noted.  Strength was 5/5 and straight leg test was negative.  Thoracolumbar ROM after repetition showed flexion of 90 degrees (normal) and combined ROM of 240 (normal).  All measurements were without pain.  At the time of the physical therapy clinic appointment on 14 May 2007, 3 months prior to separation, lumbar spine ROM also showed flexion of 90 degrees and combined ROM of 240 degrees.  There was no painful motion.  

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The PEB rated the low back condition 10%, coded 5243 (intervertebral disc syndrome).  The VA also rated the low back condition 10%, coded 5242 (degenerative arthritis of the spine), based on the C&P examination, citing neuropraxia of S1, status post laminectomy/discectomy, lumbar spine.  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.  After due deliberation, considering all of 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 low back condition.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the low back condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, the panel recommends no change in the PEB adjudication.  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 20170405, w/atchs  
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record  
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans Affairs Record  

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

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

		Reference your application submitted under the provisions of DoDI 6040.44 (Section 1554, 10 USC), PDBR Case Number PD-2017-03318.

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.  Accordingly, 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.  Accordingly, I accept their recommendation that your application be denied.

						Sincerely,

								XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
								Director
								Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Record of Proceedings