BOARD DATE: 10 September 2014
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140013828
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 mental health diagnosis was changed during that process.
3. The applicant submitted an application through the DOD Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) Mental Health 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 a mental health condition during processing through the military disability system.
2. The Department of Defense memorandum, dated 27 February 2013, directed the Service Secretaries to conduct a review of mental health 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 Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) diagnosis or Service rating determination.
2. The SRP considers the appropriateness of changes (if any) in the MH diagnoses and provides remedial recommendations if it is judged that there were any elimination or unfavorable change in an MH diagnosis by the Service. The SRP further considered whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Section 4.129 were applicable to any unfitting MH condition (physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudicated or SRP recommended) and made rating recommendations in accordance with VASRD Section 4.130 (and VASRD Section 4.129 as appropriate). Since the service acknowledged and rated the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) condition, with application of VASRD Section 4.129, there was no question regarding an unfavorable elimination or downgrading of an MH diagnosis. Therefore, the applicants case did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project.
3. The SRPs charge in the applicants case was assessing the fairness of the TDRL rating for PTSD. The PEB assigned the minimum 50 percent rating allowed by VASRD Section 4.129, but the SRP must consider whether the VASRD Section 4.130 criteria for a 70 percent or 100 percent rating were reasonably satisfied by the evidence at TDRL placement. The SRP agreed that VASRD Section 4.130 criteria for a 100 percent rating (total occupational impairment) were not met and considered the 70 percent criteria, i.e., occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood; referencing typical symptoms of suicidal ideation, obsessional rituals, illogical speech, near continuous panic or depression, spatial disorientation, neglect of hygiene, and inability to establish relationships. At the time of temporary retirement the applicant remained occupationally functional; there was no serious impairment in most areas as dictated by the 70 percent rating description; and, most of the exampled typical features were not present; therefore, the minimum 50 percent rating allowed by VASRD Section 4.129 was applicable.
4. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP agreed, mindful of VASRD Section 4.3 (reasonable doubt), that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEBs TDRL rating for PTSD.
5. 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) AR20140013828
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014534
The PDBR SRP conducted a comprehensive review of the applicants submissions and records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of a mental health condition during processing through the military disability system. The SRP further considered whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Section 4.129 were applicable to any unfitting MH condition (physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudicated or SRP recommended), and made...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007642
The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. After a comprehensive review of the case, the SRP recommended by unanimous vote that the applicants prior determination be modified to reflect a TDRL rating of 50 percent rather than 30 percent for her PTSD condition, and no change to her prior permanent rating of 30 percent for the PTSD condition. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140006943
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. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP agreed that conceding reasonable doubt, a fair permanent rating...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140008914
The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The diagnosis of anxiety disorder was the only established MH diagnosis in the service treatment records (STR), thus there was no unfavorable change of diagnosis. The SRP's charge was assessing the fairness of the service determination that criteria for the diagnosis of PTSD were not met, not whether an established diagnosis was eliminated.
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 | CY2014 | 20140009060
In this case, however, the SRP concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to support a conclusion that a highly-stressful event severe enough to bring about the Veterans release from active military service occurred and that the application of VASRD Section 4.129 was not appropriate. The SRP noted that the debate therefore focused on a 50 percent versus 70 percent rating. The PEB quoted the VASRD Section 4.130 criteria in assignment of a 30 percent rating, but the SRP considered if...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007675
The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in the MH diagnoses; the physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination; if unfitting, whether the provisions of VASRD, section 4.129, were applicable; and a disability rating recommendation in accordance with VASRD, section 4.130. The SRP noted that while the PEB had placed the applicant on the TDRL, application of VASRD, section 4.129, required a minimum disability rating of 50 percent with re-evaluation. As a result, the Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140009051
The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in the applicant's MH diagnoses and the physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination; and if unfitting, whether the provisions of VASRD Section 4.129 were applicable; and whether a disability rating recommendation in accordance with VASRD Section 4.130 was made. The SRP then considered whether the evidence supported a permanent rating higher than the 30 percent adjudicated by the PEB at the time of the applicant's removal from the...
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 | 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...