RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME:XXXXXXXXXXXXX		CASE: PD-2021-00050 BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY	SEPARATION DATE: 20030822

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was an active duty E5, Parachute Rigger, medically separated for “retropatellar pain syndrome, left knee,” with a disability rating of 10%.

CI CONTENTION: “Found not eligible for retirement.” 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 - 20030502	VARD - 20030823	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
Retropatellar Pain Syndrome, Left Knee	5099-5003	10%	Left Knee Retropatellar Pain Syndrome	5099-5019	10%	20030611	
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: 40%	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Retropatellar Pay Syndrome, Left Knee. According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI’s left knee condition began in October 2000 after a bad parachute landing fall. X-rays at the time were normal. During the 3 February 2003 MEB examination (recorded on DD Forms 2807-1 and 2808), 7 months prior to separation, the CI indicated that he had knee trouble and reported that he wore a knee brace. Physical examination revealed left knee pain with varus stress, positive patella apprehension, but no laxity. There was also pain in the left knee when he duck-walked, but it didn’t stop him from performing it.

The 13 February 2003 MEB NARSUM examination, 6 months prior to separation, noted complaints of inability to kneel on floor, climb on or off vehicles, or in and out of aircraft without significant pain. Focused examination by Orthopedics showed no effusion or laxity, and full active range of motion (ROM). Patellar grind test was positive, but Lachman’s and McMurray’s tests were negative. An MRI showed a small Baker’s cyst without evidence of meniscal tear and X-rays continued to be normal.

At the 11 June 2003 VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination, 2 months before separation, the CI reported intermittent left knee pain and reduced ability to stand, walk, run, or kneel. Physical examination showed no tenderness, pain, or laxity, and a normal gait. Left knee ROM testing showed 140 degrees of flexion (normal) and 0 degrees of extension (normal). The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the left knee condition 10%, analogously coded 5099-5003 (degenerative arthritis), citing the US Army Physical Disability Agency pain policy. The VA also rated the left knee condition 10%, analogously coded 5099-5019 (bursitis), based on the C&P examination, citing “painful or limited motion of the knee.”

Panel members agreed that neither the NARSUM examination nor the VA C&P examination showed any evidence of limited or painful motion. There was no history or evidence of dislocated meniscus or loose body causing frequent locking with recurrent effusions (5258), or history of surgery to remove a meniscus (5259) to support a rating under those codes. There was no fracture, nonunion or malunion of the femur or tibia to support consideration under the respective codes for knee impairment related to long bone conditions (5255, 5262). No additional functional limitation was evidenced by the examinations. There is therefore no applicable VASRD §4.71a rating higher than the 10% adjudicated by the PEB.

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 left knee condition.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the left knee condition, 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:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20210427, w/atchs Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans Affairs Record

3/10/2022

2	PD-2021-00050

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

AR20210016188, XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dear XXXXXXXXXXX:
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.

Sincerely,
3/11/2022

Printed on	Recycled Paper