IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  17 September 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150013363 


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 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 Department of Defense 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 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 any MH condition during processing through the Disability Evaluation System (DES).  Diagnoses of Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression, both in remission, were rendered during the DES process.  The SRP agreed there was no inappropriate changes in diagnosis and therefore determined that MH diagnoses were not changed to the applicant’s possible disadvantage in the disability evaluation.  Therefore the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Diagnosis Review Project.

3.  The SRP agreed that Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication of not unfitting PTSD and depression disorder was supported by the evidence.  The applicant attributed PTSD symptoms to events that occurred during the first deployment.  Yet, in the years after his return, he was able to work in supervisory positions, at times attending school part-time.  He was able to achieve an Associates’ degree by 1996.  A Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam in 1998 noted no psychiatric history.  He did not appear to have a MH issue until 2005 due to being overwhelmed by the hours associated with his job as an Army recruiter.  Shortly thereafter he was diagnosed with fibromyalgia, a condition known to include symptoms of anxiety and depression.  Between December 2009 and April 2010, the applicant reported his PTSD and depression symptoms had remitted and medications were discontinued.  It was determined PTSD symptoms had resolved, he met retention standards, and he was found fit for duty (FFD). 

4.  The SRP noted the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Part II exam rendered a diagnosis of PTSD not meeting retention standards but was completed by a non-MH provider.  Ten days later the behavioral health exam on 21 January 2011 was completed by a MH provider and rendered a diagnosis of anxiety disorder not otherwise specified (NOS).  He was again deemed FFD.  The last non-commissioned officer (NCO) evaluation dated 7 months prior to separation documented a superior level of performance.  Although the commander noted 

both physical and mental deterioration that was interfering with his performance, this would be congruent with symptoms associated with fibromyalgia.  He was taking medications to treat fibromyalgia and not to treat PTSD and/or depression. 

5.  The SRP noted that two different psychiatrists submitted memos to the command that the applicant was psychiatrically FFD.  The SRP also noted inconsistencies between his description of symptoms to the offsite provider and to the onsite provider.  There were marked differences between the C&P exam and previous MH exams, even to the extent that the C&P examiner determined the applicant did not meet criteria for PTSD or any psychiatric disorder. 

6.  The SRP acknowledged the applicant was able to achieve a Bachelor’s and a Master’s degree between 2008- 2010, periods during which he endorsed PTSD and depression symptoms.  The SRP noted that there were no active suicidal or homicidal thoughts, no legal issues, no reports of domestic violence, nor any psychiatric hospitalizations for a 24-month period prior to separation.  He had a good marriage and was not receiving treatment for a MH condition.  The SRP concluded that the applicant may have had diagnoses of PTSD and depression at some point, but there was no evidence of any unfitting mental disorder at the time of separation. 

7.  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 condition at separation.

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 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)                                  AR20150013363



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1