RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04410 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His military service disability of 10 percent be increased to match his Department of Veteran Affairs (DVA) disability rating of 50 percent. 2. By amendment at Exhibit E, he would like his diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder, single episode, in remission, on Abilify, to be changed to Chronic Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood (Veterans Administration Schedule Ratings for Disability (VASRD) Code 9440)). ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The DVA made their determination based on the same evidence that was available to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) at the time they gave their rating. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DVA Rating Decision. His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 18 Dec 01. On 28 Mar 11, the applicant met an Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) for Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), single episode, in remission, on Abilify. The Narrative Summary dated 10 Jan 11 reflects the following: AXIS I: 296.26 Major Depressive Disorder, single episode, in full remission. AXIS II: No Diagnosis. AXIS III: Hyperlipidemia and chronic back pain. AXIS IV: Occupational problems, strong primary support. AXIS V: Global Assessment of Functioning (*GAF): Current = 75-85; highest in past year = same. *GAF: Is a numeric scale (0 through 100) used by mental health clinicians and physicians to subjectively rate the social occupational and psychological functioning of adults, e.g., how well or adaptively one is meeting various problems-in-living. Scale of 71-80: If symptoms are present, they are transient and expectable reactions to psychosocial stressors; no more than slight impairment in social occupational, or school functioning. Scale of 81-90: Superior functioning in a wide range of activities, life’s problems never seem to get out of hand, is sought out by others because of his or her many positive qualities. No symptoms. The Narrative Summary, dated 10 Jan 11, DISCUSSION Portion: Taken together, data obtained from clinical assessment self-report and my clinical observations suggest mild to moderate AXIS I pathology in the form of major depressive disorder, single episode. The applicant has been functioning well since hospitalization in July. He reported remission of all symptoms since receiving treatment with Prozac, Abilify, and therapy. He attributes the recent hospitalization to difficulty functioning in his new job in recruiting but prior to that in his prior job in aerospace ground equipment for 8 years he had never experience these symptoms. Based on the results for this evaluation, there does not appear to be any other psychosocial and biological factors that would have predisposed him to development of depression outside of recent change to recruiter duty. The IPEB recommended him to be discharged with 10 percent severance pay. The applicant agreed with the IPEB recommendations on 11 Apr 11. He received an honorable discharge and a narrative reason for separation of “DISABILITY, SEVERANCE PAY, NON COMBAT” on 24 May 11 after serving 9 years, 5 months, and 8 days on active duty. On 19 Feb 13, the applicant’s case was administratively closed, per his request and then reopened on 9 Apr 13. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 1. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial stating the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process or the rating applied at the time of the boards. It was noted by the IPEB that, “… after an attempted suicide … He reported having a lot of regrets about accepting the recruiting job because he had no idea of the demands and strain it would place on him…His prognosis is documents as “good with treatment” … However, as long as he is on the Ability this would make him non-worldwide qualified.” 2. The Department of Defense and the DVA disability evaluation systems operate under separate laws. Under Title 10, U.S.C., Physical Evaluation Boards must determine if a member’s condition renders them unfit for continued military service relating to their office, grade, rank or rating. The fact that a person may have a medical condition does not mean that the condition is unfitting for continued military service. Further, it must be noted the USAF disability boards must rate disabilities based on the member’s condition at the time of evaluation; in essence a snapshot of his condition at that time. It is the charge of the DVA to pick up where the Air Force must, by law, leave off. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His initial request was to increase his military service disability rating; however, after further research he now believes that his diagnosis of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD), single episode, in remission, on Abilify, should be changed to Chronic Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. His rationale for this request is based on four factors: 1) The onset of his disability occurred shortly after a recent job change and lasted at least 6 months. 2) He showed improvement after being removed from the recruiting office. 3) The medical narrative provided on AF Form 356, Findings and Recommended Disposition of USAF Physical Evaluation Board, along with other information within a worldwide qualification evaluation that was completed by his physician describes his medical condition as Chronic Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. 4) The disparity between the DoD rating and the DVA rating applied to his disability identifies the disability that he suffered from during his time in the service is separate from his current disability which is rated appropriately by the DVA. The Narrative Summary includes how the demands of his job and the strain led to him developing a disability, also another criterion of Chronic Adjustment Disorder. The summary does not match the diagnosis criteria for MDD. He believes that the only reasonable explanation for the difference in the ratings is because his disability at the time of his IPEB was, in fact, Chronic Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not find that it supports a determination that his separation with severance pay because of physical disability in 2011 was improper or contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations. We took note of the applicant’s contention that at the time of his disability processing his diagnosis of “Major Depressive Disorder, single episode, in remission on Abilify” should reflect “Chronic Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood.” However, the evidence available to us reflects that his disability discharge was properly executed and we find no basis to warrant disturbing the record. Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale expressed as the basis for our decision. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04410 in Executive Session on 7 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 12, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 16 Nov 12. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Dec 12. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Mar 13, w/atchs.