RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX		CASE: PD-2017-05592 BRANCH OF SERVICE: MARINE CORPS	SEPARATION DATE: 20080215

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Motor Transport Mechanic, medically separated for “bilateral, right greater than left, inguinal pain,” rated 10% and 0%, respectively, with a combined disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION: “Review all conditions.” 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 - 20071212	VARD - 20080710	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Right Inguinal Pain	8730	10%	Bilateral Inguinal Hernia Repair with Scar	7805	0%	20080213	
Left Inguinal Pain	8730	0%					
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: 20%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Right Greater than Left Inguinal Pain. According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI underwent bilateral inguinal hernia repair in April 2006 without complications. However during recovery, despite a variety of treatment modalities and no evidence of recurrent hernias, the CI’s inguinal pain continued (right greater than left).

The 24 October 2007 MEB NARSUM examination, 4 months prior to separation, noted complaints of bilateral groin pain elicited by position changes and physical training. A general physical examination (PE) revealed tenderness along the inguinal (groin) crease. There was no evidence of an inguinal hernia.

At the 13 February 2008 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, 2 days prior to separation, the CI reported testicular pain. The PE revealed a normal gait, and the abdomen, genitalia and neurologic evaluations were all normal. There was no evidence of recurrent hernias. There was a scar within the belly-button (from hernia surgery) which was depressed,

but otherwise without tenderness, disfigurement, ulceration, adherence, instability, or keloid. There was no comment with regard to the surgical scars being painful.

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the right and left groin conditions 10% and 0%, respectively, both coded 8730 (neuralgia of the ilio-inguinal nerve). The VA rated the bilateral inguinal pain 0%, coded 7805 (scars, other), based on the C&P examination, citing a non-disabling scar.

Panel members first deliberated on the most appropriate and beneficial coding scheme in representing the CI’s overall pain condition. The typical surgical approach to repair an inguinal hernia intimately involves the identification and manipulation of the Illio-inguinal nerve. However, the maximum rating under code 8730 is 10% for “severe to complete” paralysis, but the evidence in this case did not reveal that level of impairment. The panel also considered rating under code 7338 (inguinal hernia); however, there was no evidence of even a “small reducible hernia” to support a 0% rating. In regards to surgical scars, the panel could not find evidence to support the minimum rating of 10% for an unstable or painful scar. Therefore, panel members agreed that none of the applicable coding schemes referenced above would support a combined rating higher than the 0% for either the right or left inguinal pain. However, IAW DoDI 6040.44, the panel may not recommend a rating lower than that adjudicated by the PEB. Therefore, after 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’s adjudication for the right and left inguinal pain.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the right and left inguinal pain and IAW VASRD §4.124a, 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-2017-05592

DEPARrnENT OF THE NAVY
SECRETARY OF TI!E 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.