RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW 

BRANCH OF SERVICE: MARINE CORPS 
DATE OF PLACEMENT ON TDRL:  19961202 

 
NAME:   
CASE NUMBER:  PD1200052 
BOARD DATE: 20121018                                         DATE OF PERMANENT SEPARATION:  20011001 
 
 
SUMMARY  OF  CASE:    Data  extracted  from  the  available  evidence  of  record  reflects  that  this 
covered  individual  (CI)  was  an  active  duty  Marine,  SSGT/E-6(0481,  Longshoreman),  medically 
separated for a mental health condition.  He did not respond adequately to treatment and was 
unable to fulfill the physical demands within his Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), meet 
worldwide deployment standards or meet physical fitness standards.  He was placed on limited 
duty  and  underwent  a  Medical  Evaluation  Board  (MEB).    Obsessive-compulsive  disorder, 
severe;  chronic  pancytopenia  and  glucose  6-phosphate  dehydrogenase  deficiency  were 
forwarded  to  the  Physical  Evaluation  Board  (PEB)  IAW  SECNAVINST  1850.4D.    No  other 
conditions  appeared  on  the  MEB’s  submission.    The  PEB  adjudicated  the  mental  health 
condition  as  unfitting,  rated  30%  and  placed  the  CI  on  the  Temporary  Disability  Retired  List 
(TDRL).  The remaining condition(s) were determined to be not unfitting and adjudicated to be 
Category  III  (not  separately  unfitting  and  not  contributing  to  the  unfit  condition)  and  IV 
(condition that does not constitute a physical disability) as identified on the rating chart below.  
After  5  years  on  the TDRL,  the PEB  adjudicated  a  permanent  disability rating of 10%  for the 
mental  health  condition  with  application  of  SECNAVINST  1850.4D  and  the  Veteran’s  Affairs 
Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD).  The CI made no appeals and was medically separated 
with a 10% disability rating. 
 
 
CI CONTENTION: The CI states: “Please review my Department of Veterans files and outpatient 
treatment records from 04/01/97 – 01/01/2012.  Those files and records will give a clearer 
picture of why I believe the rating for the condition which rendered me unfit should be 
changed.”  
 
 
SCOPE OF REVIEW:  The Board wishes to clarify that the scope of its review as defined in the 
Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6040.44 (Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e.(2) is limited to 
those conditions which were determined by the PEB to be specifically unfitting for continued 
military  service;  or,  when  requested  by  the  CI,  those  condition(s)  “identified  but  not 
determined to be unfitting by the PEB.”  The ratings for unfitting conditions will be reviewed in 
all cases.  Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside 
the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for 
Correction of Naval Records.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
TDRL RATING COMPARISON: 
 

Service PEB – Dated 20010719 

Condition 
On TDRL – 
19961202 

Obsessive 
Compulsive 
Disorder Severe 

9404 

30% 

10% 

Chronic 
Pancytopenia 
Glucose 6-Phospate 
Dehydrogenase Deficiency 

 

 

Category III 

Category IV 

 

 

Code 

 

Rating 

TDRL 

19961202 

VA* – All Effective Date 19970301 

Sep. 

Condition 

Code 

Rating 

Exam 

Obsessive-Compulsive 
Disorder w/History of 
Adjustment Disorder 
w/Mixed Emotional 
Feelings 
No VA Entry 

Glucose-6-Phpspate 
Dehydrogenase Deficiency 

9404* 

30% 

19970515 

 

 

7716 

 

 

  

0% 

19970502 

↓No Additional MEB/PEB Entries↓ 

Combined:  10% 

0% x 2/Not Service Connected x 12 

19970502 

Combined:  30% 

*Code on VARD of 19970922 was 9440. 
 
 
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:  The Board acknowledges the sentiment expressed in the CI’s application, 
i.e., that there should be additional disability assigned for the unfitting condition.  It is a fact, 
however, that the Disability Evaluation System (DES) has neither the role nor the authority to 
compensate members for anticipated future severity or potential complications of conditions 
resulting  in  medical  separation.    This  role  and  authority  is  granted  by  Congress  to  the 
Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA).  The Board utilizes DVA evidence proximal to separation 
in arriving at its recommendations; and, DoDI 6040.44 defines a 12-month interval for special 
consideration to post-separation evidence.  The Board’s authority as defined in DoDI 6040.44, 
however, resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness determinations and rating decisions 
for disability at the time of separation.  Post-separation evidence therefore is probative only to 
the  extent  that  it  reasonably  reflects  the  disability  and  fitness  implications  at  the  time  of 
separation. 
 
Obsessive-compulsive  disorder.    The  CI  sought  care  for  depression  in  March  1996  and  was 
treated  with  Prozac.    He  was  transferred  to  a  new  duty  station  in  August  1996  and  shortly 
thereafter  was  hospitalized  for  suicidal  thoughts.    Upon  admission  he  reported  obsessive 
compulsive  symptoms  which  were  excessive  and  unreasonable  but  he  was  unable  to  deter 
them  and  thus  culminated  in  depressive  symptoms.    The  obsessive-compulsive  (OC)  rituals 
described by the CI disrupted his work, significantly stressed his family relationships with his 
wife and daughter and impaired his social relationships.  During his one month hospital stay his 
medications were changed, he attended individual and group therapy and reported overall a 
more  hopeful  outlook  yet  his  obsessive-compulsive  disorder  (OCD)  symptoms  had  not 
improved.  At the MEB, performed at the time of his hospital discharge in September 1996, his 
mental status exam was abnormal for a depressed mood and blunted affect however no further 
suicidal ideations.  The examiner diagnosis of OCD classified as severe and assigned a GAF of 40 
at the time of admission and 70 at the time of discharge.  At the VA Compensation and Pension 
(C&P) exam, performed 5 months after placement on the TDRL, the CI reported working as a 
supervisor but was looking for a better paying job with more responsibility and that his OCD 
symptoms had resolved to a large degree since leaving the military.  He further reported the 
military was difficult for him as he was unable to delegate, he focused on the financial concerns 
for his wife and thus felt stressed out and depressed.  The C&P mental status exam (MSE) was 
abnormal for observations of obsessive compulsive ritual of aligning papers during the exam, an 
over  reporting  of  anxiety  symptoms,  impaired  insight  and  fair  judgment.    The  examiner 

   2                                                           PD1200052 
 

diagnosed  obsessive/compulsive  personality  disorder.    The  examiner  further  opined  this 
disorder  may  be  exacerbated  at  times  when  he  was  under  significant  psychosocial  or 
occupational stress, and had led to a decompensation with depression in the past, therefore he 
may  have  some  occupational  limitations  however  he  was  handling  his  current  occupation 
without difficulty. 
 
At the October 1998 TDRL interim exam the CI reported he quit his supervisory job after a year 
due to stress with exacerbation of his obsessive compulsive disorder.  Since then he had taken a 
full-time custodian position at a post office which was beneficial since it limited him to a forty 
hour  work  week.    He  still  reported  checking  behaviors  but  felt  that  this  job  had  helped  to 
contain his compulsive behavior since he was not allowed to work more than an 8 hour day.  He 
had not been hospitalized, was taking mood medication and denied depressive symptoms but 
still had OCD symptoms.  The MSE was normal.  The examiner opined his degree of social and 
occupational impairment was minimal.  The CI was kept on TDRL as he was undergoing further 
evaluation of a T10 fracture in lieu of his pancytopenia for possible oncologic disorders. 
 
At  the  final  TDRL  exam,  performed  in  May  2001,  the  CI  reported  he  continued  to  have 
significant symptoms of OCD, with regards to cleanliness and precision spending up to 6 hours a 
day and more on the weekend.  He declined a supervisory position at the post office for fear of 
being unable to delegate or spending excessive hours at work.  He also reported the forty hour 
work limitation was best suited for his social and marital life.  He reported his OCD thoughts 
and behaviors were as severe as they were prior to treatment.  He was taking mood medication 
which  helped;  however,  he  did  have  a  relapse  with  depression  secondary  to  psychosocial 
stressors,  losing  20-30  pounds  that  did  not  require  hospitalization.    He  stated  he  was  not 
depressed at the time of the exam and denied any suicidal or homicidal ideations.  He was not 
attending behavioral therapy.  He was compliant with treatment, seeing a psychiatrist once a 
year and a nurse practitioner every 3 months.  The final TDRL MSE was abnormal for a serious, 
restricted affect and not notable for depression.  The examiner opined the degree of civilian, 
social, and occupational impairment was deemed significant due to his severe OCD which had 
caused him to have limited employment opportunities and behaviors which were disconcerting 
and caused concern from his wife, daughter and friends.  The MEB examiner cited the internal 
medicine notes  and drew  attention  to  “the patient’s psychiatric  condition  has not  stabilized.  
The  prognosis  is  guarded  and  is  deemed  poor  if  he  continues  to  experience  his  recurrent 
symptoms  since  it  greatly  limits  both  his  employment  opportunities  as  well  as  his  social 
functioning.”  There was an addendum to the PEB for the TDRL periodic physical dated 3 May 
2001 in which the examiner, likely the internal medicine examiner, documented that the OCD 
and  T10  conditions  had  not  required  or  led  to  loss  of  time  at  work.    The  examiner  further 
documented the pancytopenia laboratory values were stable and had improved and spinal films 
were normal with minimal arthritic changes and no evidence of a fracture.  The examiner added 
depression as additional diagnosis and suggested behavioral therapy for his OCD. 
 
The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence.  The 
PEB and VA chose the same coding options for the condition and assigned a rating IAW VASRD 
§4.130 Schedule of ratings-mental disorders.  The PEB assigned a rating of 30% with placement 
on  TDRL  for  a  severe  OCD  that  had  not  stabilized  to  the  point  that  a  permanent  degree  of 
severity  could  be  determined.    The  PEB  assigned  a  permanent  recommendation  of  10%  for 
likely stable OCD symptoms, improved depressive symptoms and having a full-time occupation.  
The  VA  assigned  a  rating  of  30%  for  occupational  and  social  impairment  with  occasional 
decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks.  
The evaluator cited the condition was subject to further improvement and a future exam would 
be  conducted.    This  future  exam  performed  in  January  1999  and  the  30%  was  upheld  for 

persistent  OCD  symptoms  which  had  interfered  with  work  activities  but  had  not  affected 

current employment, for fair insight and judgment and for a GAF of 60, connoting moderate 

   3                                                           PD1200052 
 

impairment.  The examiner further documented he did not had any major problem in socializing 

with others.   
 As regards to the TDRL placement rating recommendation, all members agreed that the §4.130 

threshold for the 70% rating was not approached.  The deliberation settled on arguments for a 
50% vs. a 30% rating recommendation.  The CI fit the 50% descriptor (occupational and social 
impairment  with  reduced  reliability  and  productivity)  at  the  time  of  his 
immediate 
hospitalization.    Upon  discharge  from  the  hospital  the  evidence  reflects  no  further  suicidal 
ideations and an improvement in his depressive symptoms yet his OCD symptoms remained the 
same.  The Board notes the CI was undergoing a MEB from September 1996 to December 1996 
and  further  notes  there  is  no  occupational  or  social  evidence  after  his  hospitalization.  
Therefore, the Board agreed the 50% descriptor is a better fit at the time of TDRL placement.  
As regard to the permanent rating recommendation, all Board members agreed the 50% rating 
was  not  approached  and  deliberation  settled  on  arguments  for  the  30%  descriptor 
(“occupational  and  social  impairment  with  occasional  decrease  in  work  efficiency  and 
intermittent  periods  of  inability  to  perform  occupational  tasks”)  and  for  the  10%  descriptor 
(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…).  
The  Board  notes  while  on  TDRL  there  is  no  resurgence  of  suicidal  ideations,  a  transient 
resurgence  of  depressive  symptoms  and  stable  OCD  symptoms  which  the  CI  noted  had 
improved  upon  release  from  active  duty.    The  Board  further  notes  during  the  entire  TDRL 
period the CI maintained full-time employment with two different jobs, without loss of work 
due  to  his  condition.    However,  the  Board  notes  while  he  initially  accepted  a  supervisory 
position he later quit which he stated was due to increase stress and worsening of his OCD.  The 
historical  account  in  the  VA  exam  reflects  however  he  wanted  a  better  paying  position  and 
therefore  there  is  speculation  as  to  why  he  left  his  first  job.    In  his  current  position  he  was 
offered a supervisory position yet declined for fear worsening his OCD symptoms which may 
lead to more than 40 hours in a work week.  The Board notes this supervisory offer was made in 
spite of prepping his cleaning cart for 30-40 minutes upon arrival and prior to leaving work.  The 
action officer opines, at this point in time, the CI had some insight and judgment with regards 
to his mental health condition to make this reasonable and appropriate decision.  The Board 
notes the evidence reflects the CI is doing well in his current employment and there is no loss of 
time from work which meets the 10% descriptor criteria.  The Board deliberated at length if the 
CI’s current employment is equivalent to the functions required of him while in the Marine Corp 
and  further  deliberated  if  the  inability  to  function  in  a  supervisory  role  could  be  considered 
occupational impairment with decrease work efficiency to merit the 30% descriptor.  The Board 
majority agreed the postal position is equivalent to his military functions and further agreed 
holding supervisory positions, both in the military in the civilian life, led to an increase in stress 
which exacerbated the CI’s OCD symptoms.  Therefore the Board majority agreed at the mental 
health condition at the time of separation best fit the 10% descriptor.  After due deliberation, 
considering  the  totality  of  the  evidence  and  mindful  of  VASRD  §4.3  (reasonable  doubt),  the 
Board  majority  recommends  50%  TDRL  rating  and  a  10%  permanent  disability  rating  for  the 

mental health condition. 

 
 
BOARD FINDINGS:  IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or 
guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were 
inconsistent  with  the  VASRD  in  effect  at  the  time  of  the  adjudication.    The  Board  did  not 
surmise  from  the  record  or  PEB  ruling  in  this  case  that  any  prerogatives  outside  the  VASRD 
were  exercised.    In  the  matter  of  the  mental  health  condition,  the  Board,  by  a  vote  of  2:1, 
recommends a 50% disability rating upon entry on TDRL and a permanent disability rating of 
10%, coded 9404 IAW VASRD §4.130.  The single voter for dissent (who recommended a 50% 
disability rating upon entry on TDRL and a permanent disability rating of 30% coded 9404 IAW 

   4                                                           PD1200052 
 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

VASRD CODE 

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Severe 

9404 

COMBINED 

RATING 

PERMANENT 

TDRL 
50% 
50% 

10% 
10% 

VASRD  §4.130)  submitted  the  appended  minority  opinion.    There  were  no  other  conditions 
within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.   
 
 
RECOMMENDATION:  The Board recommends that the CI’s prior determination be modified as 
follows, effective as of the date of his prior medical separation:   
 

 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
Exhibit A.  DD Form 294, dated 20120102, w/atchs 
Exhibit B.  Service Treatment Record 
Exhibit C.  Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

             
           President 
           Physical Disability Board of Review 

   5                                                           PD1200052 
 

Minority Opinion: 
 

This CI met the criteria for 50% disability at separation.  His condition improved during 

his TDRL period, reaching the 30% criteria.  During a 13 year period (1997-2010), the CI has 
maintained a rather consistent level of disability – that of 30% - validated 5 times by the VA.  At 
his last TDRL evaluation, 5 months prior to TDRL exit (or permanent separation), the CI clearly 
met the 30% criteria, not the 10% criteria as suggested by the Marine Corps, and actually 
presented some signs that are characteristic of 50% ratings.  

The CI demonstrated occupational impairment with reduced productivity, impaired 

judgment and difficulty with social relationships (50% criteria); depressed mood, anxiety and 
anxiousness, and suspiciousness which collectively have caused occupational and social 
impairment with occupational and personal inefficiencies, have limited his ability to perform 
occupational and family tasks (all 30% criteria) and prevented occupational growth; and he has 
presented consistent symptoms (not mild or transient and not limited to periods of significant 
stress; another words, more than the 10% criteria) which impair him occupationally and 
socially.   

At work, his compulsiveness to spend 30-45 minutes of his work-day prepping for a 3 

hour task, only to re-do the same 3 hour task during the remainder of the day showed impaired 
judgment, reduced his productivity, demonstrated decreased occupational efficiency, limited 
his usefulness at work for other tasks, and by his own choice has limited his occupational 
growth.  While he stated at the second VA exam that he enjoys this job, he has chosen a job 
which accommodates his OCD condition but is far from the potential he exhibited between 
1985 and 1996 as he rose from Private to Staff Sergeant in the Landing Support career field, 
ultimately serving as a Military Career Counselor and Platoon Sergeant.  He has chosen to avoid 
his weaknesses (OCD) and not to capitalize on his strengths – thereby limiting the positive 
impact he might bring to his civilian job.  His choice validated his disease.  His compulsiveness 
has limited his ability to perform.  His compulsive behaviors consume 6 hours of every waking 
day – that is 6 hours that he could have easily devoted to his job, to his wife or to his daughter.  
Analytically, he has spent 1/3 of his waking day in compulsive behavior – this is not mild or 
transient – it is not caused by significant stress nor is it controllable by medication – it is every 
day – it is his life. 

I strongly recommend that the CI’s prior determination be modified as follows:  TDRL at 

50% and then a permanent 30% disability retirement as below. 

UNFITTING CONDITION 

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder Severe 

 
 

 

 

VASRD CODE 

9404 

COMBINED 

TDRL 
50% 
50% 

RATING 

PERMANENT 

30% 
30% 

   6                                                           PD1200052 
 

      
 

                COMMANDER, NAVY PERSONNEL COMMAND 
                                       

MEMORANDUM FOR DEPUTY COMMANDANT, MANPOWER & RESERVE AFFAIRS 
 
 
Subj:  PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW (PDBR) RECOMMENDATIONS           
 
Ref:   (a) DoDI 6040.44 
          (b) PDBR ltr dtd 2 Nov 12   
          (c) PDBR ltr dtd 6 Nov 12   
          (d) PDBR ltr dtd 14 Nov 12   
                               
1.  Pursuant to reference (a) I approve the recommendations of the Physical Disability Board of 
Review set forth in references (b) through (d). 
 
2.  The official records of the following individuals are to be corrected to reflect the stated 
disposition: 
 
    a.  former USMC:  Retroactive increase in disability rating from 30 percent to 50 percent for 
the period member was on the Temporary Disability Retired List with a final disability rating of 
10 percent effective 1 October 2001. 

    b. former USMC:  Disability retirement with a final disability rating of 30 percent and 
assignment to the Permanent Disability Retired List effective 15 July 2005. 

    c. former USMC:  Disability retirement with a final disability rating of 30 percent and 
assignment to the Permanent Disability Retired List effective 30 April 2007. 
 
3.  Please ensure all necessary actions are taken, included the recoupment of disability severance 
pay if warranted, to implement these decisions and that subject members are notified once those 
actions are completed. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

   
  Assistant General Counsel 
    (Manpower & Reserve Affairs)  

 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 
 
 

 
 
 

   7                                                           PD1200052