RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX		CASE: PD-2017-04665 BRANCH OF SERVICE: MARINE CORPS	SEPARATION DATE: 20071015

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Antitank Assault Guided Missileman, medically separated for “lumbago” with a disability rating of 20%.

CI CONTENTION: Review of all conditions requested. 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 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 - 20070808	VARD - 20080430	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Lumbago	5237	20%	Lumbosacral strain	5237	10%	20080327	
L4 Spondylolysis	Cat II					
COMBINED RATING: 20%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: 70%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Lumbago. According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s lumbago condition began in May 2006 after hitting his lower back upon being thrown into the turret of his vehicle during an explosion. During a 19 June 2007 NARSUM addendum examination, 4 months prior to separation, the CI reported pain was exacerbated by mobilization of lumbar spine and physical activity. The examiner found the lower extremities normal. Manual muscle testing of bilateral lower extremities was 5/5 throughout with full active range of motion (ROM). Flexion was recorded as 55 degrees (normal 90) and combined ROM was 190 degrees (normal 240) after repetition.

During the 10 July 2007 NARSUM addendum examination, 3 months prior to separation, the CI reported pain so great he was unable to get out of bed. Physical examination revealed tenderness. ROM measurements were flexion of 75 degrees and combined ROM of 170 degrees. During the MEB examination (recorded on DD Forms 2807-1 and 2808), 2 days later, the CI reported “back problems.” Physical examination revealed tenderness with 80 degrees flexion

and 220 degrees combined ROM with painful motion. An undated MEB NARSUM examination had the same information as the MEB examination and was written by the same examiner.

At the 27 March 2008 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, 5 months after separation, the CI reported pain on exertion and during certain activities. The CI denied any incapacitating episodes or any radiating pains. Physical examination showed after repetitive ROM testing against resistance, that the CI demonstrated flexion to 70 degrees and a combined ROM of 220 degrees, with pain noted at the limits of flexion.

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the lumbago condition 20%, coded 5237 (lumbar spine strain). The PEB listed the L4 spondylolysis condition as a related diagnosis (Category II) that contributed to the disability in this case. The panel agreed that the L4 spondylolysis was a diagnosis related to the lumbago and was not a separate condition which could be separately rated IAW §4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding; more than one rating based on the same impairment is prohibited). The VA rated the lumbago condition 10%, coded 5237 (lumbar spine strain), based on the C&P examination, citing forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine of 70 degrees. The panel agreed that a 20% rating, but no higher, was justified for limitation of flexion (greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees) as reported on the NARSUM addendum examination. 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 lumbago condition.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the lumbago 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:

2	PD-2017-04665

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
SECRETARY OF TIIE NAVY COUNCIL OF REVIEW BOARDS 720 KENNON STREET SE STE 309
WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DC 20374-5023

IN REPLY REFER TO:
1850
CORB: 003
10 Sep 20

From: Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards To:	 

Subj: PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) Ref:	(a) DoDI 6040.44
1.	Pursuant to reference (a), the PDBR reviewed your case and forwarded its recommendation to the Department of the Navy on 13 Aug 2020 for appropriate action.

2.	On 27 August 2020, the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve Affairs) accepted the recommendation of the PDBR ofno change to your characterization of separation or disability rating assigned by the Department of the Navy's Physical Evaluation Board.

3.	The Secretary's decision on your PDBR application is final and is not subject to appeal or additional review by the Board for Correction of Naval Records.