IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 September 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140014434 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 applicant's MH diagnoses; Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) fitness determination and, if unfitting, whether the provisions of Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 were applicable; and whether a disability rating recommendation in accordance with VASRD section 4.130 was made. 3. The SRP considered the criteria for diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-4th Edition Text Revision (DSM-IV TR). Anxiety disorder was listed as the MH diagnosis on the profile, narrative summary (NARSUM), Medical Evaluation Board (MEB), and PEB. As documented in the psychiatric NARSUM, the applicant’s rebuttal (with attachments), the impartial provider review, and the Deputy Commander for Clinical Services response to rebuttal there were differences of opinions from different providers between the diagnosis of anxiety disorder not otherwise specified, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and PTSD with depression during the Disability Evaluation System (DES). Therefore, the applicant met the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 4. The SRP addressed the entirety of the evidence, including the post- retirement VA exams with special attention to the level of detail and documentation of the PTSD criteria in accordance with (IAW) DSM-IV TR. The SRP acknowledged the treatment providers’ indication that the applicant reported symptoms that met most of the DSM-IV TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD; however, there was not a preponderance of evidence that the applicant fully met DSM-IV TR diagnostic criteria for PTSD since Criterion A was not clearly met with linkage of the stressor and the applicant’s symptoms. 5. The SRP concluded that although PTSD may have been a reasonable diagnosis during the DES, there was not a preponderance of the evidence sufficient to change the applicant’s unfitting diagnosis to PTSD. The SRP considered whether the provisions of VASRD section 4.129 was applicable for the unfitting MH condition and determined that the provision was not applicable and therefore, appropriately not applied. 6. The SRP then addressed the appropriateness of the MH rating level in accordance with VASRD section 4.130 at the time of retirement. The SRP concluded that there was insufficient evidence that the MH diagnosis or permanent rating should be modified. 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) AR20140014434 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1