IN THE CASE OF

		BOARD DATE:	    23 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010669 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, the case file should be reviewed in accordance with the Secretary of Defense directive for a comprehensive review of members who were referred for a disability evaluation between 11 September 2001 and 30 April 2012 and whose MH diagnosis was changed during that process.

3.  The applicant submitted an application through the Department of Defense (DOD) Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) MH Special Review Panel (SRP).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant's submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system.

2.  The DOD memorandum, dated 27 February 2013, directed the Service Secretaries to conduct a review of MH diagnoses for service members completing a disability evaluation process between 11 September 2001 and 30 April 2012 to determine if service members were disadvantaged by a changed diagnosis over the course of their physical disability process.

3.  In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the PDBR SRP and the applicant was provided a copy.

4.  The applicant did not respond to the advisory opinion.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  After a comprehensive review of the applicant's case, the SRP determined by unanimous vote that there should be no change to the applicant's disability and retirement determination.

2.  The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in the MH diagnoses, the physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination; and if unfitting, whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 were applicable, and a disability rating recommendation in accordance with VASRD section 4.130.

3.  The SRP noted the evidence of the available records show that the diagnoses of major depression and anxiety disorder were the only diagnoses rendered during processing through the Disability Evaluation System and thus no MH diagnosis was changed to the applicant's possible disadvantage.  Therefore, the SRP determined the criteria for the terms of reference for the MH Review project was not met.

4.  The SRP later considered whether the applicant's MH conditions, regardless of specific diagnoses, were unfitting for continued military service.  The SRP's main charge with respect to the MH condition was an assessment of the fairness of the PEB's determination that it was not unfitting.  The SRP's threshold for countering service fitness determinations was higher than the VASRD, section 4.3 (reasonable doubt), standard used for its rating recommendations, but remained adherent to the DOD Instruction 6040.44 "fair and equitable" standard.  An established principle for fitness determinations was that they were performance-based and the SRP was confronted in this case with the lack of evidence that the limitations imposed by any MH condition prohibited the performance of the applicant's required military duties.

5.  The SRP agreed the evidence of record reflected significant traumatic exposures during deployment which often required medication and counseling to control; however, maintaining the psychological ability to deploy multiple times for prolonged periods directly reflected her (MH) fitness for duty.  Although the MH condition was forwarded by the medical evaluation board (MEB) as separately failing retention standards, the SRP could find no evidence in the Service treatment records of objective performance-based criteria for concluding the MH condition was independently unfitting.

6.  After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded the PEB's determination that the MH condition was not unfitting at the time of the applicant's separation and not subject to a disability rating was correct.

7.  The available evidence shows the SRP's assessment should be accepted.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X___  ___X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      ___________X____________
                  CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20040003532



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                  AR20140010669



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1