SAF/MRBD (PDBR)
3351 Celmers Lane
JBA NAF Washington, MD 20762-6435

MEMORANDUM FOR THE DIRECTOR, ARMY REVIEW BOARDS AGENCY

SUBJECT:  Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation on 
       XXXXXXXXXXX, Case Number PD-2020-00138

	In accordance with Title 10 § 1554a and in compliance with DoDI 6040.44, the Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) adjudicated the disability rating accompanying the medical separation of the covered individual from the United States Army.  After carefully reviewing the application and medical separation case file, the PDBR recommended no re-characterization of the separation or modification of the disability rating previously assigned.  I recommend you accept this proposed decision.

The covered individual (CI) was an active duty E4, Signal Support Systems Specialist, medically separated for “chronic bilateral testicular and scrotal pain” with a disability rating of 0%. The PEB analogously coded the condition 8799-8730 (neuralgia, ilio-inguinal nerve, paralysis), citing pain.  The VA also rated the left varicocele and small bilateral hydrocele condition 0%, analogously coded 7599-7525 (epididymo-orchitis, chronic only), citing a noncompensable Compensation & Pension genitourinary examination since long-term drug therapy, one or two hospitalizations per year, or intermittent intensive management were not demonstrated.  The higher rating of 10% requires evidence of severe disability.  The profile allowed the CI to run, bike or swim at his own pace and distance.  Upper and lower body weight training was allowed.  He was not allowed to carry objects weighing more than 15 pounds to include no wear of a backpack or body armor.  Panel members agreed, the 0% rating and no higher was warranted for moderate disability.  There were no additional codes to consider for higher rating.  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 testicular and scrotal pain.

	In the matter of the contended chronic bilateral knee pain, bilateral pes planus, and hypertension conditions, none of the conditions were profiled and did not fail retention standards.  There was no commander’s performance statement in evidence to verify if any of these conditions significantly 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 any of the contended conditions, so no additional disability ratings are recommended.  

In the matter of the contended primary bladder neck dysfunction, the panel noted the condition was chronic; however, there was no documentation of recurrent urinary tract infection, or significant urinary retention. Although the condition was profiled and failed retention standards, the profile did not demonstrate restrictions specific to his condition.  After due deliberation, the panel concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the contended condition, so no additional disability rating is recommended.

AR20210008026

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:

	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.