BOARD DATE: 30 July 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140011158 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 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 a mental health condition during processing through the military disability system. 2. The Department of Defense 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 in order 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 be no change of the applicant’s disability and medical retirement determination. 2. The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes (if any) in the applicant's MH diagnoses and the appropriateness of the physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination for any MH condition. If the SRP judged that a MH condition was unfairly characterized as not unfitting by the Service; it further considered whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Section 4.129 were applicable and made recommendations for said ratings in accordance with VASRD Section 4.130. 3. The SRP’s determined the MH condition, under guidelines of the MH Review Project, was to judge (based on a preponderance of evidence) whether a diagnosis was changed to the potential disadvantage of the applicant or whether a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) was changed or unfairly eliminated. As noted, consideration of PTSD was not relevant to this case. Although there was some controversy regarding the specific MH diagnosis, there was no unfavorable consequence associated with the PEB adjudicated diagnosis. The applicant’s case did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 4. The SRP noted that there were likewise no issues regarding an unfavorable service fitness determination; and, in this case, no link of the diagnosis to service stressors which would qualify for application of VASRD Section 4.129. The SRP was left only with the charge of assessing the fairness of the PEB’s rating determination at retirement. The SRP agreed that the VASRD Section 4.130 requirements for a 70 percent rating (occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood) were not met. At the time of temporary retirement, the applicant remained occupationally functional and there was not serious impairment in “most areas” as dictated by the 70 percent rating description. 5. The SRP also considered the deliberation of a 50 percent recommendation (occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity) versus a 30 percent rating (occupational and social impairment with occasional decrease in work efficiency and intermittent periods of inability to perform occupational tasks). 6. The SRP noted that the commander’s statement indicated that the applicant’s occupational limitations at the time of retirement were confined to military-specific requirements; and, the civilian occupational picture at the time of the Compensation and Pension (C&P) evaluation did not reflect any crucial MH impediments to employment, but rather a life choice at that point in time. Although the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) assignments by both the medical evaluation board (MEB) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) examiners were indicative of significant impairment, the clinical description of symptoms and mental status examination (MSE) details by both examiners indicated that the perseveration of the religious ideation and some residual mood lability posed the only significant MH impairment; which would not logically be a significant barrier to occupational functioning. The prior suicidal ideation, panic attacks and acute symptoms of depression and anxiety appear to be resolved, or nearly so, at separation. 7. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP agreed, mindful of VASRD Section 4.3 (reasonable doubt), that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB’s separation rating for the depressive disorder. 8. 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 that 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) AR20140011158 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1