Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150007871
Original file (20150007871.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  11 June 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150007871 


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 processing.

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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System and determined that the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project.

3.  The SRP acknowledged the Compensation & Pension (C&P) examiner’s assessment and diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); however, there was insufficient clinical evidence to support that Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Edition) (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria were met since there was no clear evidence in the treatment record to support that the applicant met full criteria for a PTSD diagnosis at the time of Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) placement. 

4.  The SRP noted that the C&P exam did not sufficiently demonstrate that the applicant fulfilled DSM-IV-TR criterion C and B.  Additionally, there was insufficient evidence to support the diagnosis of depressive disorder not otherwise specified (NOS).  The SRP agreed that the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication of unfitting anxiety disorder NOS was supported by the evidence and was the appropriate diagnosis.  The SRP also noted the provisions of Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 were appropriately not applied at TDRL placement. 

5.  The SRP considered if there was evidence for a VASRD section 4.130 rating higher than 30 percent at time of placement on the TDRL.  The higher rating of 50 percent requires evidence of “Occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity due to such symptoms as: flattened affect; circumstantial, circumlocutory, or stereotyped speech; panic attacks more than once a week; difficulty in understanding complex commands; impairment of short- and long-term memory retention of only highly learned material; impaired judgment; impaired abstract thinking; disturbances of motivation and mood; difficulty in establishing and maintaining effective work and social relationships.” 
6.  The SRP considered the record in evidence did not support a rating higher than 30 percent for TDRL placement.  The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) next considered the rating recommendations at TDRL removal.  At TDRL removal, the SRP noted the diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD) was assessed and adjudicated by the PEB with anxiety disorder.  The PEB noted the applicant’s condition had progressed to include MDD and that she had a TDRL re-evaluation for “her unstable condition of PTSD.”  

7.  The SRP also noted the PEB noted that the reexamination showed occasional decrease in work efficiency for intermittent periods; however, she was rated as stable.  Although the applicant reported the absence of panic attacks in 2012, in 2014 she indicated she had panic attacks that had caused her to miss work.  There were no records of visits to the emergency room for panic attacks.  The applicant’s condition was stable and did not reflect a disability rating higher than the 30 percent rating criteria.  After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the applicant’s MH conditions at TDRL removal.

8.  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)                                  AR20150007871



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2014 | 20140015794

    Original file (20140015794.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in or elimination of diagnoses of the MH condition to the possible disadvantage of the applicant during processing through the military Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). Both the MEB and the VA examiners specifically noted that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision, (DSM-IV-TR) diagnostic criteria for PTSD were not met. The SRP next considered if the evidence...

  • 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 | CY2014 | 20140002392

    Original file (20140002392.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 SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in the mental health (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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015809

    Original file (20140015809.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). The SRP acknowledged the Compensation and Pension (C&P) examiner’s assessment and diagnosis of PTSD; however, there was insufficient clinical evidence to support that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria were met since there was no clear evidence in...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014262

    Original file (20140014262.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a comprehensive review of the applicant’s case, the SRP determined by unanimous vote that there should no change in the physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudication of the temporary disability and permanent retirement determination. The SRP noted the neurology medical evaluation board (MEB) recorded the diagnosis of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and that the neuropsychological evaluation had not recorded a diagnosis of PTSD and PTSD had not appeared in any other clinical...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150005638

    Original file (20150005638.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 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 Disability...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010672

    Original file (20140010672.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of changes in diagnosis of the MH condition during the applicant's processing through the military Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP determined that there was insufficient reasonable doubt in accordance with VASRD Section 4.3 for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140013545

    Original file (20140013545.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 Disability Evaluation System (DES). The SRP considered the record in evidence and determined that there was insufficient evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015782

    Original file (20140015782.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests a review of the military disability evaluation pertaining to a mental health (MH) condition. The higher rating of 70 percent required demonstration of impairment in most areas, which was not supported by the record; she had not been hospitalized, there were no recorded suicidal ideations, and although the narrative summary (NARSUM) examiner stated her panic disorder was severe there were no recorded visits to the emergency room, no legal issues, and no evidence of...