RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW
NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	CASE: PD-2017-04846
BRANCH OF SERVICE: NAVY	SEPARATION DATE: 20050919

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E5, Air Traffic Controller, medically separated for “right ankle joint arthralgia” with a disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION: No specific contention was made. 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 - 20050812	VARD - NA	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Right Ankle Joint Arthralgia	5299-5003	10%	No VA Examination Proximate to Separation in Evidence	
Right Superficial Peroneal Nerve Entrapment Neuropathy	Cat II		
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: NA	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Right Ankle Joint Arthralgia. According to the service treatment record (STR) and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI underwent right ankle surgery to repair a trimalleolar ankle fracture after a twisting injury in February 2004. The hardware was removed in July 2004 and in April 2005 the CI underwent superficial peroneal nerve release.

The 1 June 2005 MEB NARSUM examination, 4 months prior to separation, noted complaints of right ankle pain, deformity, instability, giving way, numbness, tingling, stiffness, swelling, weakness, and limping all of which were aggravated by standing, walking, running, stairs, rough ground, hard pivots, and jumping. Physical examination showed persistent swelling and stiffness. Two days later MEB examination (recorded on DD Forms 2807-1 and 2808), showed diffuse ankle tenderness without swelling and full range of motion (ROM).

The 28 July 2005 physical therapy clinic visit, 2 months prior to separation, noted right ankle pain with prolonged standing. The ROM study showed 10 degrees of dorsiflexion (normal 20) and 55

degrees of plantar flexion (normal 45), and mild weakness with plantar flexion (4+/5), inversion (4/5) and eversion (4/5). The examiner also noted pain with inversion. At the 1 August 2005 orthopedic clinic visit, right ankle ROM testing showed 10 degrees of dorsiflexion and 55 degrees of plantar flexion. During the MEB addendum examination 2 days later, the CI complained of “persistent pain along his superficial peroneal nerve and over the lateral aspect of his fibula and some ankle pain with activities.” He was unable to run and also complained of swelling and tenderness. Physical examination showed tenderness and mild swelling along the fibula. Right ankle ROM testing showed 10 degrees of dorsiflexion and 50 degrees of plantar flexion. The examiner noted a positive Tinel’s (nerve irritation) sign over the superficial peroneal nerve. X- rays showed traumatic right ankle arthritis. 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 right ankle condition 10%, analogously coded 5299-5003 (degenerative arthritis). Panel members agreed the Category II condition of right superficial peroneal nerve entrapment, which contributed to the primary unfitting condition, was an intertwined diagnosis, and any disability from this condition was properly subsumed under the rating for the right ankle condition to avoid pyramiding (§4.14).

All panel members agreed the limitation of motion was no more than “moderate,” therefore supporting the 10% rating adjudicated by the PEB. A higher rating of 20% was not indicated in the absence of “marked” limited ROM of the right ankle. 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 right ankle condition.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the right ankle 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.

2	PD-2017-04846

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:	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.