Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011255
Original file (20140011255.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  30 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140011255 


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 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. 

3.  The SRP noted that the reconsideration PEB’s adjudication appropriately applied Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 and granted a Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) entry rating of 50 percent as recommended by the VA’s proposed rating decision document. 

4.  The SRP reviewed the entire record for evidence of a higher rating at TDRL entrance.  SRP members agree that the applicant did not meet the rating criteria for the next higher rating at entry into TDRL.

5.  The SRP noted that 14 months after entry into the TDRL and 3 months after the first TDRL evaluation, the PEB assigned a permanent disability rating of 30 percent based on that TDRL interim evaluation.

6.  The SRP reviewed the record for evidence that the next higher rating should have been awarded.  Based on the entirety of the record, there was no reasonable doubt that a disability rating greater than 30 percent at TDRL removal can be supported by the evidence present for review.

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)                                  AR20140011255



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011255

    Original file (20140011255 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted an application through the Department of Defense (DOD) Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) MH Special Review Panel (SRP). 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 record for evidence that the next higher rating should have been awarded.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150015662

    Original file (20150015662.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 (DES). The SRP considered whether the provisions of VASRD section 4.129 were applicable for the unfitting MH condition.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010716

    Original file (20140010716.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 applicant's MH condition during processing through the military Disability Evaluation System. The SRP next reviewed the rating recommendation at the time the applicant was removed from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010901

    Original file (20140010901.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007373

    Original file (20140007373.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The SRP deliberated whether there was evidence for a VASRD Section 4.130 rating higher than 50 percent at the time of placement on the TDRL. The pre-TDRL VA examiner's observation that the applicant was near his pre-morbid level of function and the NARSUM's characterization of occupational impairment were also noted. The SRP agreed that the 70 percent rating criteria were not reflected in the evidence, and thus concluded that a rating higher than 50 percent at the time of placement on the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011034

    Original file (20140011034.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted an application through the Department of Defense (DOD) Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) MH Special Review Panel (SRP). 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 entire record for evidence that a higher rating should have been granted at TDRL entrance.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011591

    Original file (20140011591.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the military Disability Evaluation System (DES). Because the applicant was referred into the DES process with a diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), but the VA examination (which was considered part of the DES process), narrative summary (NARSUM), medical evaluation board (MEB) and physical evaluation board (PEB) listed a diagnosis of major depression,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008940

    Original file (20140008940.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 considered the appropriateness of changes in the 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;...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140001852

    Original file (20140001852.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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 determination at Temporary Disability Rating List (TDRL) entry. After due deliberation in consideration of the evidence,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010917

    Original file (20140010917.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicant’s submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of a MH condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP also considered if there was evidence for a VASRD Section 4.130 rating higher than 50 percent at time of placement on the TDRL. The SRP concluded that the 70 percent criteria was not reflected in the evidence and therefore agreed that a rating higher than 50 percent...