RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE:  PD-2017-05574
BRANCH OF SERVICE:  Army	SEPARATION DATE:  20090609

SUMMARY OF CASE:  Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was a Reserve E5, Carpentry and Masonry Specialist, medically separated for “lumbosacral strain” with a disability rating of 20%.  

CI CONTENTION:  “Getting worse over the years.”  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 - 20090501	VARD - NA	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Lumbosacral Strain	5237	20%	No VA Examination Proximate to Separation in Evidence	
COMBINED RATING:  20%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS:  NA	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  

Lumbosacral Strain.  According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s back condition began in 2003 after a fall on an obstacle course prior to her deployment to Iraq.  During the 27 January 2009 MEB examination (recorded on DD Forms 2807-1 and 2808), 5 months prior to separation, the CI reported back pain.  Physical examination of the spine showed tenderness between the scapulae (thoracic spine) and pain with extension and twisting.  The 18 February 2009 MEB NARSUM examination noted complaints of mid to lower thoracic back pain.  The CI rated the pain 7/10 at rest and stated there was no radiation of pain.  Physical examination showed a normal gait with no muscle spasms.  Thoracolumbar spine range of motion (ROM) demonstrated flexion of 55 degrees (normal 90) and combined ROM of 140 degrees (normal 240).  Straight leg raise testing was negative at 90 degrees in the sitting position.  Diagnostic imaging was reported as normal.  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 back condition 20%, coded 5237 (lumbosacral strain), citing forward flexion to 55 degrees.  Of note, remote from separation, the VA had also rated the back condition 20%, coded 5237, effective 7 September 2006 (based on a 5 June 2007 VA examination) citing painful motion with thoracolumbar flexion to 50 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 MEB NARSUM examination.  There was no evidence of intervertebral disc syndrome which resulted in incapacitating episodes requiring physician-prescribed bed rest to warrant consideration of rating under the alternate VASRD formula for that condition.  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 back condition.  

BOARD FINDINGS:  In the matter of the 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.  

ARXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXX 

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXX:

	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.