RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW
NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE: PD-2017-04811
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  NAVY	SEPARATION DATE: 20071231

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E3, Aviation Structural Mechanic Airman, medically separated for “persistent low back pain (LBP)” with a disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION: “I feel it should have been hire. The Navy had me listed as no more than 20 lbs., when lifting something.” 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 - 20071004	VARD - 20080219	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Persistent LBP	5299-5237	10%	Lumbar Spine and Sacroiliac Joint Pain with Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD)	5242	10%	20080102	
DDD	Cat II					
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: 30%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Persistent LBP. According to the service treatment record (STR) and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s persistent LBP began in December 2005 after lifting heavy objects. An MRI performed in January 2006 revealed board-based disc bulges at L4-L5 and L5-S1 as well as narrowing of the nerve-exiting canal at L5-S1. In July 2007, the CI underwent radio-frequency ablation to multi-level lumbar facets without significant benefit. The 17 August 2007 MEB NARSUM examination, 4 months prior to separation, noted complaints of constant LBP made worse with all activities. The physical examination (PE) revealed pain over the lumbosacral region of the spine. Spinal range of motion (ROM) noted flexion to 45 degrees (normal 90) and extension to 10 degrees (normal 30). Peripheral sensation and motor control were intact. Heel and toe walk were normal.

At the 2 January 2008 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, one month after separation, the CI reported constant LBP which worsened with prolonged standing and or sitting. The PE revealed a normal gait. There was no evidence of local erythema, warmth, swelling or

tenderness. Muscle spasms were present along the lumbar spine. Spinal flexion was documented at 75 degrees and combined ROM at 180 degrees (normal 240) with painful motion.

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the persistent LBP 10%, analogously coded 5299-5237 (lumbosacral strain). The PEB also listed DDD as a related Category II condition that contributed to the primary unfitting condition but was not separately ratable. In this case the Category II condition had aspects of the same disability and is not a separately unfitting condition or separately ratable IAW §4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding; more than one rating based on the same impairment is prohibited). The VA also rated the lumbar spine and sacroiliac joint pain with DDD condition 10%, coded 5242 (degenerative arthritis of the spine), based on the C&P examination, citing forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine at 75 degrees with pain and combined ROM at 180 degrees.

The panel agreed that a 10% rating, but no higher, was justified for limitation of flexion (greater than 60 degrees but not greater than 85 degrees) as reported on the VA examination which was most proximate to the time of separation. Although low back spasms were present, the severity was not to a level that resulted in an abnormal gait or spinal contour, thus the next higher 20% rating was not justified on this basis. 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 persistent low back pain condition.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the persistent low back pain and IAW VASRD §4.71, 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.

2	PD-2017-04811

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
SECRETARY OF THE 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:	XXXXXXXXXXXXX

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.