IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  19 February 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140000246 


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 a mental health 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 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 should be no change of the applicant’s disability and separation 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 Panel considered the criteria for diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders IV TR including: the evidence for the stressor (criterion A), re-experiencing of the event (criterion B), persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with the trauma (criterion C), hyperarousal (criterion D), duration and onset (criterion E), presence of clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important area of functioning (criterion F). 

4.  The SRP first determined if any MH diagnoses were changed during the Disability Evaluation System process.  The physical profile included the diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and assigned a permanent psychiatric level three (P S3) on 30 November 2010.  The Narrative Summary (NARSUM, on 8 November 2010, listed PTSD with moderate symptomatology.  The Medical Evaluation Board, on 8 November 2010, listed PTSD and the PEB, on 25 February 2011, also listed PTSD.  The Informal PEB (IPEB) reconsideration listed PTSD. 

5.  The SRP determined that no MH diagnoses were changed to the applicant's possible disadvantage in the disability evaluation process.  Therefore, the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 

6.  The PEB determined the MH condition should not to be unfitting.  The SRP’s charge with respect to MH conditions referred for review that were determined not to be unfitting by the PEB is an assessment of the appropriateness of the PEB’s fitness adjudication.  The SRP’s threshold for countering PEB not-unfit determinations required a preponderance of evidence.
 
7.  The SRP reviewed and considered the MH condition.  The MH condition was profiled as an S3 condition on 30 November 2010.  The first commander’s statement on 1 September 2010 did not mention any MH diagnosis or psychiatric impairment.  The second commander’s statement on 2 March 2011, listed the PTSD diagnosis, and stated that all the individual diagnoses were tolerable, and the applicant had effective work relationships with both supervisors and co-workers, most of the limitations were of a physical nature.

8.  The psychiatrist examiner determined that the applicant would be unlikely to function well if deployed, and have a high risk for decompensating, thus the prognosis was poor for future military service, but fair to good for occupational and social development once separated from military life and continued his psychiatric treatment in civilian life.  Extensive deliberations and examination of the record ensued.

9.  There was no indication that the MH condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance by the commander’s statement or in the record. The profile limited the applicant from combat and imposed no other psychiatric limitations upon the performance of the applicant’s primary military duties.  There was an absence of prior psychiatric treatment and profiles while performing his duties prior to placement in Warrior Transition Unit (WTU), and the subsequent MH referral for evaluation and treatment, from which to infer any additional occupational impairment.

10.  After significant deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the MH condition, and, therefore, no disability ratings were recommended. 

11.  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)                                  AR20140000246



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1