RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:XXXXXXXXXX
BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY

CASE:  PD-2017-06067
SEPARATION DATE: 20050825

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (Cl) was an active duty E4, SIGINT Analyst, medicall y separated for "low back pain" with a disability rating of 10%.

Cl CONTENTOI N:  In addition to the unfitt ing back and not-unfi tting right wrist conditi ons, the  Cl reque sted re view of conditions not identified by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and Physical Evaluation Board (PEB). The complete submi ssion 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 PEB to be unfitting for continuedmilitary service, and when specifi cally requested by the Cl, t ho se conditions identifi ed by the MEB, but determined by the PEB to be no t unfitting or non-compensable. Any conditions out side 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 Correc t ion of Militar y Records. The panel' s authority is limit ed to assessing the fai rness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections when appropriate. The panel gives conside ration to VA evidence, part icularly with in 12 months of separat ion, but only to the extent that it reasonab ly reflects the severit y of disabi lity at the time of separation.

RATINGCOM PARISON:

SERVICE PEB - 20050516	VARD- 20051223	
Condition	Code	I Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Low Back Pain	5299-5237 I	10%	Low Back Strai n	5237	20%	20050628	
Right Wrist Pain	Not Unfi tt ing	St atu s Post Right Wrist Surgery	5215	10%	20050628	
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: 40%	

ANALYSISSUMMARY:

Low Back Pain. According to the service treatment record and MEB nar rative sum mary (NARSUM), the Cl' s back condition began in August 2003 while lifti ng. X-rays in March and April 2004 were negative and surger y was not indicated . Fourteen separate chirop ractic entries during the period 26 March-18 May 2004 showed t enderness and muscles spasms of the spine. During the 30 March 2005 MEB NARSUM examinat ion, the Cl complained of 4-7/ 10 back pain which worsened with cold weather or lifting. Physica l examination showed a normal gait and the ability to heel and toe walk wit hout difficulty. Range of motion (ROM) testing by physical therapy on
23 March 2005 showed 65 degrees of flexion (normal 90) and 180 degrees of combined thoracolumbar ROM (normal 240). There was no change in ROM after repetition. Limit ati ons we re due to pain.

At the 28 Ju n e 2004 VA Compen sation and Pen sion (C&P) examination, 2 months before separati on, the Cl reported 8/ 10 back pain, elicited by physical activity, that did not cause incapacitat ion. Physica l examination sho wed normal gait and posture. There was tenderness

but no ankylosis or m uscle spasm. Thoracolumbar ROM test ing, after repetition, sho wed fl exion of 60 degrees and combined ROM of 160 degrees with pain in all planesof motion .

The panel direct ed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the back condition 10%, analogously coded 5299-5237 (lumbosacra l strain), citing ROM limited by pain. The VA rated the back condition 20%, coded 5237, based on the C&P examination, citing forward flexion of the thoracolumbar spine greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees.

Panel members considered the somewhat disparate ROM examinations proximate to separation . Both the MEB and VA examinations were conducted prior to separation, but the VA exam ination was more proximate to separation and, therefore, held more probative value. The panel agreed that a 20% rating, but no higher, was justified for limitation of  fl exion greater than 30 degrees but not greater than 60 degrees, as reported on the VA examinat ion . After due deliberation, considering all the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the panel recommend s a disabi lity rating of 20% for the back condition, coded 5237.

Conte nded PEB Condit ion : Right Wrist Pain . The panel' s main charge is to assess the fa irness of the PEB determ ination that the contended condition was not unfitting. Although the contended conditi on was profi led, there were no specific limit ation s listed (Ul). The commander indicated the Cl was "p hysically capable of reasonably performing his duties as a 98C Signals Int elligence (SIGINT) analyst with his permanent profile for ...his wrist injury." The MEB indicated the right wrist pain was "medically acceptable." There was no performance-based evidence from the record that the condition significant ly interfered with satisfactory duty performance at separation. After due deliberation, the panel concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the contended condit ion, so no additional disabi lit y rating is recommended.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the back conditi on, the panel recommends a disabi lity rating of 20%, coded 5237 IAW VASRD §4.71a. In the matter  of the contended right  wrist condition, the panel recommends no change from the PEB determ ination as not unfi tt ing. There are no other conditions with in the pane l' s scope of review for consideration. The panel recommends the Cl' s prior determination be modified as follows, effective the date of medical separation :

	CONDITION	VASRD CODE	PERMANENT RATING	
Low Back Pain		5237	20%	

The fo llowi ng documentary evidence was considered:

2	PD-2017-06067

AR20200004646,

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
ARMY REVIEW BOARDS AGENCY 251 18TH STREET SOUTH, SUITE 385
ARLINGTON, VA 22202-3531

Dear

The Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR)
reviewed your application and found that your disability rating should be modified but not to the degree that would justify changing your separation for disability with severance pay to a permanent retirement with disability. I have reviewed the Board's recommendation and record of proceedings (copy enclosed) and I accept its recommendation. This will not result in any change to your separation document or the amount of severance pay. A copy of this decision will be filed with your Physical Evaluation Board records. I regret that the facts of the case did not provide you with the outcome you may have desired.

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.

A copy of this decision has been provided to the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Printed on$	Recycel d Paper