Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013562
Original file (20140013562.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  10 September 2014	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140013562 


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 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 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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the military Disability Evaluation System (DES).  The MH diagnoses major depressive disorder (MDD) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were consistently applied within the DES process and therefore, the SRP agreed the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 

3.  The medical evaluation board (MEB) presumably identified MDD, recurrent as existed prior to service (EPTS) and PTSD as EPTS and as diagnoses not meeting medical retention standards as noted on the DA Form 199.  The SRP determined that the applicant was correctly diagnosed with MDD and PTSD and looked for clear and unmistakable evidence that the MH conditions were EPTS and were not permanently service-aggravated.  The evidence supported that the applicant answered “No” to all questions related to MH conditions on his entrance history and physical exam forms completed in October 2009. 

4.  The SRP first deliberated on the physical evaluation board’s (PEB’s) EPTS determination and agreed that while the applicant’s historical account suggested an EPTS MH condition, the evidence did not overcome the “presumption of soundness” as required in the United States Army Physical Disability
Agency memo dated 9 December 2009.  

5.  The SRP’s charge with respect to the 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.  The SRP looked for fitness for duty related evidence and noted that the commander’s statement and the physical profile were not available for review.  The service treatment records were reviewed for any fitness related documentation and the SRP agreed that there was no evidence that suggested the applicant’s MH condition interfered with performance of his duties. 

6.  The SRP reviewed the file for evidence of permanent service aggravation of the MH conditions.  The evidence suggested that the applicants MH conditions were exacerbated by the knee injury he suffered along with the stress he perceived from his unit’s leadership structure.  The evidence also suggested that the applicant’s MH symptoms improved significantly as the MEB process neared completion, his sleep improved (after treatment for sleep apnea), he was looking forward to life after the military, he “generally reported no significant depressive symptoms and his mental status exam was normal.” 

7.  The SRP concluded the service aggravation was not permanent in nature and his MH symptoms would continue to improve.  The applicant did not deploy and there was no traumatic stressor identified during US military service and therefore the SRP concluded that there was not sufficient evidence for the application of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Section 4.129. 

8.  After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that the applicant’s MH conditions were not unfitting or permanently service aggravated and were not recommended for additional disability rating.

9.  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)                                  AR20140013562



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015771

    Original file (20140015771.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 mental health condition during processing through the military disability system. The applicant was not diagnosed with PTSD prior to TDRL entry, did not meet criteria for PTSD at TDRL exit, and the TDRL examiner noted his VA treating psychiatrist recorded MDD in partial remission as the only diagnosis. After due deliberation in consideration...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150007873

    Original file (20150007873.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 noted the diagnosis of anxiety disorder was noted on the profile and physical and not recorded at the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) and subsequently not adjudicated by the PEB; therefore, this diagnosis was eliminated. After due deliberation in consideration of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015997

    Original file (20140015997.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The SRP next considered if the anxiety disorder, NOS was a diminution of a PTSD diagnosis and whether a preponderance of the evidence in record supported a recommendation for a change in the diagnosis of the MH condition. The SRP, having agreed that the MH condition was service ratable, next considered whether application of VASRD Section 4.129 was appropriate in this case. The SRP majority thereby recommended a 6-month period of constructive TDRL with a minimal rating of 50 percent for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014261

    Original file (20140014261.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the military Disability Evaluation System (DES). The VA rated the PTSD condition at 50 percent based on evidence from this exam.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150005732

    Original file (20150005732.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150007336

    Original file (20150007336.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The SRP carefully reviewed the available records and noted the records demonstrated absence of symptoms to support a PTSD or MDD diagnosis. The higher 70 percent rating was for “Occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood.” Available treatment records at the time leading up to TDRL...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010918

    Original file (20140010918.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150006212

    Original file (20150006212.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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System (DES). The evidence of the available records show diagnoses of major depressive disorder (MDD), post-traumatic...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140012003

    Original file (20140012003.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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the applicant's MH condition during processing through the military Disability Evaluation System (DES). The preponderance of evidence did not support a PTSD diagnosis and there was no...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000114

    Original file (20140000114.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 mental health 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 be no change of the applicant’s disability and separation. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that...