IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  23 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010686 


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; if unfitting, whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) 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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes or elimination of diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System and found none.  Therefore, the applicant did not appear to meet the inclusion criteria in the terms of reference of the MH review project.

4.  The SRP noted the psychiatric memorandum to the medical evaluation board (MEB) indicated the applicant had no psychiatric condition that impaired his duty performance.  The MEB narrative summary (NARSUM) included a diagnosis of anger management disorder – which was not a recognized psychiatric condition and not recorded in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV), under any coding scheme – that was medically acceptable and the MEB forwarded the anger management condition to the PEB for adjudication.

5.  The SRP noted the applicant contended post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in his application, but also noted he was not diagnosed with PTSD prior to the final PEB adjudication.  Following the PEB's final adjudication, one VA examiner diagnosed PTSD; however, there was no evidence that the applicant fully met DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for PTSD and the PTSD diagnosis was not endorsed by the next three VA psychiatric examiners who evaluated the applicant within the next 8-month time period, spanning a month prior to separation to 3 months after separation.

6.  The SRP noted that at the psychiatric visit a month prior to separation, the examiner noted that although the applicant had an occasional deployment related nightmare, "He did not talk about any flashbacks or intrusive thoughts.  He felt that this was not an issue for him at this time."  The SRP agreed there was not sufficient evidence in the applicant's record to support a diagnosis of PTSD.

7.  The SRP next considered whether any MH condition diagnosed by the VA and the service medical treatment facilities, regardless of specific diagnosis, was unfitting for continued military service.  The MH condition was determined to be not unfitting by the PEB.  The SRP's charge with respect MH conditions referred for review that were determined to be not unfitting by the PEB was 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.

8.  The SRP determined the notes in the Service treatment records supported that the applicant was planning to remain in the military and redeploy if his non-MH conditions resolved sufficiently and that his treating physicians agreed with his plans.  However, symptoms related to his physical condition were refractory to treatment and precluded the applicant's plans to stay in the military.  The NARSUM noted the applicant was working 5 days per week with his activities limited by his physical condition.

9.  The SRP also determined no MH condition was profiled or implicated in the commander's statement or judged to fail retention standards by the MEB NARSUM psychiatrist or the MEB.  There was no indication from the records that the applicant's MH condition significantly interfered with his satisfactory duty performance.

10.  After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB fitness determination for the applicant's MH condition and no disability ratings was 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 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)                                  AR20140010686



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1