IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 19 February 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140000661
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 applicants 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 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 applicants case, the SRP determined by unanimous vote that there should be no change of the applicants disability and entry into the Temporary Disability Retirement List (TDRL) 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 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), and 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 (DES) process. The physical profile listed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and pseudoseizures, with a permanent psychiatric level three (S3) profile. The narrative summary (NARSUM) listed PTSD, GAD and conversion disorder manifesting as pseudoseizures.
5. The Informal PEB (IPEB), dated 11 May 2010, adjudicated PTSD, GAD, panic disorder with agoraphobia and depression and conversion disorder manifesting as pseudoseizures.
6. The VA Compensation and Pension(C&P) examination, dated 23 December 2009, diagnosed Axis I: PTSD, Axis II: None, Axis III: see medical record, Axis IV: deferred, Axis V Global Assessment of Functioning for PTSD at a
55 (moderate symptoms).
7. The SRP Panel deliberated on the IPEB descriptors and determined that all the MH conditions were listed, although not separately rated in accordance with VASRD Section 4.14 (avoidance of pyramiding), Section 4.126 evaluation of disability from mental disorders, and VASRD Section 4.130 which instructs application of the same VASRD general rating formula for mental disorders for each MH diagnoses.
8. 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.
9. The IPEB adjudicated the applicants case under the pilot VA/DOD DES. The IPEB TDRL rating was derived from the VA Rating Decision (VARD) with application of Section 4.129. The applicant was still on TDRL status with a rating of 50 percent. The SRP concluded the applicants MH condition did not warrant a higher 70 percent adjudication.
10. The available evidence shows the SRPs 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) AR20140000661
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140004960
The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicants submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of an MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in the applicant's 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150008679
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. The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System. The SRP agreed that Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication of unfitting anxiety disorder NOS was supported...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015772
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. The SRP next considered if there was evidence in the record to support a recommendation of a diagnosis of PTSD, or any other MH condition, for disability rating at TDRL entry. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015391
The applicant also states that his rating for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) should have been higher and not rated with his other disabilities because they are different. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150003882
The SRP recommended no change to the physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudication of the permanent retirement rating of 30 percent for the unfitting mental health condition. The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the applicant's MH condition during processing through the military Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). The SRP noted that the PEB assigned a disability rating of 30 percent without application of VASRD Section 4.129 (Mental...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010915
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 July 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140010915 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicants submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of a MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP determined that the MH diagnoses were changed to the applicant's possible disadvantage in the disability evaluation process.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006268
The SRP could find no evidence challenging or refuting the presence of any criterion, and thus concluded that a preponderance of evidence supported an SRP recommendation that this applicant's MH diagnosis should be changed to PTSD. The SRP also noted that should the Service reject the recommendation for a change in final service diagnosis to PTSD, but agree with the application of a VASRD, section 4.129, constructive TDRL as above, the diagnosis of PTSD was firmly established by the VA for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009137
The SRP recommends no change in the applicants unfitting condition diagnosis, and that the applicants prior separation be modified to reflect that the applicant was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) at 50 percent for a period of 6 months in accordance with (IAW) the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 and then permanently separated by reason of physical disability with a final 80 percent rating. The SRP considered the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006646
There was not a preponderance of evidence in support for all of the DSM IV-TR criteria, and the medical evaluation board (MEB) psychiatrist's diagnosis of anxiety disorder, NOS was the only MH diagnosis underpinned by a comprehensive evaluation and sufficiently probative evidence. The analysis by the end-TDRL psychiatrist establishing a progression from anxiety disorder, NOS to PTSD is a reasonable assumption, and was accepted as the conclusion of the SRP majority. The SRP next addressed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010918
The SRP deliberated whether by a preponderance of evidence a service diagnosis of PTSD could be recommended in this case for a primary MH rating. The SRP agreed that a 100 percent recommendation for total occupational and social impairment at the time of TDRL placement was not indicated. A 70 percent recommendation (occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood) was likewise not supported given that...