NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

CASE: PD-2017-03971

BRANCH OF SERVICE: ARMY	SEPARATION DATE: 20060817

SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects this covered individual (CI) was a Reserve O3, Aeromedical Evacuation Officer, medically separated from the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) for “major depressive disorder [MDD] ” 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 - 20060711	VARD - NA	
Condition	Code	Rating	Condition	Code	Rating	Exam	
MDD	9434	10%	No VA Examination Proximate to Separation in Evidence	
COMBINED RATING: 10%	COMBINED RATING OF ALL VA CONDITIONS: NA	

ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

MDD. According to the service treatment record and MEB narrative summary (NARSUM), the CI was medically boarded in October 2002 with a diagnosis of “MDD, recurrent, severe without psychotic features,” which occurred after the death of her mother. She was separated and placed on TDRL on 28 January 2003. At the 9 May 2006 TDRL examination, 3 months prior to separation, she reported weekly transient episodes of crying, feelings of guilt and hopelessness, and transient suicidal thoughts “for the way my career ended.” The examiner noted that she remained on antidepressant medication and had experienced significant improvement in depressive symptoms. Her psychiatric visits had decreased in frequency, with the last occurring in February 2006. The CI was not married and lived alone, except for a boarder. She worked full- time as an aviation mechanic, and was planning to take up lake canoeing for recreation. The mental status examination was unremarkable except that she cried about the loss of her aviation career and commercial pilot’s license due to the MDD. The examiner diagnosed recurrent MDD, in partial remission, and noted “marked” impairment for further military duty, and “mild” impairment for social and industrial adaptability. There was no VA examination proximate to TDRL removal in evidence.

The panel directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the MDD 10%, coded 9434 (MDD), citing psychological difficulties with a mild impact on industrial and social capabilities.   Panel members first agreed that the provisions of   VASRD
§4.129 for a “mental disorder that develops in service as a result of a highly stressful event” were not applicable. The panel then turned to its permanent rating recommendation at the time of TDRL removal, and considered the absence of emergency room treatment, or hospitalization, and the apparent stability of symptoms during the 12 months prior to separation. The CI had continued medication with significant benefit, and her condition had improved to the extent that it was determined to be in partial remission, with no evidence of sleep, energy, memory or concentration difficulties. She worked full-time with no report of any mental health symptoms interfering with job performance or difficulties with supervisors or co-workers. Although there was no indication of significant social activity, there was no indication of social impairment. Panel members agreed that a 10% rating, but no higher, was justified for “occupational and social impairment due to mild or transient symptoms which decrease work efficiency and ability to perform occupational tasks only during periods of significant stress, or; symptoms controlled by continuous medication. 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 major depressive disorder.

BOARD FINDINGS: In the matter of the major depressive disorder and IAW VASRD §4.130, 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-2017-03971

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

AR20200000294,

Dear XXXXXXXXXXXXX

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.

Printed on	Recycled Paper