IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 March 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150002063 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 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 shows the diagnoses of major depressive disorder (MDD), cognitive disorder not otherwise specified (NOS), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and anxiety disorder NOS were rendered during DES processing. 3. The SRP noted the diagnosis of PTSD was listed in the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) history and physical (DD Form 2808) without reference to etiology or symptoms. The SRP acknowledged the diagnosis of PTSD rendered during the psychological testing; however, there was insufficient evidence to support that diagnosis and there was no evidence the diagnosis was based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM) diagnostic criteria. The psychologist did not record any PTSD symptoms and indicated the findings were obtained via personality testing. The psychologist stated that the applicant “likely” had been exposed to a traumatic event but the event was not identified in the evaluation. The applicant was evaluated by two other psychologists who did not diagnose PTSD. One psychologist diagnosed MDD; the other provided diagnoses for the MEB that did not include PTSD. There were few symptoms recorded associated with PTSD. 4. The SRP concluded there was insufficient evidence that diagnostic criteria for PTSD were met. The applicant denied all symptoms and trauma exposure in the post-deployment health assessment (PDHA). The SRP agreed there were no changes in diagnoses to the applicant’s possible disadvantage. Therefore, the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 5. The SRP noted the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), 2 years after separation, diagnosed PTSD after the applicant reported he had been exposed to significant trauma during deployment. The SRP noted that these exposures were not recorded in any other documents in evidence and were inconsistent with the PDHA. The SRP concluded the preponderance of evidence supported mood and anxiety symptoms not rising to the level of PTSD or MDD. 6. The SRP also considered whether any MH conditions were unfitting for continued military service, regardless of specific diagnosis. The SRP concluded that the evidence of the record reflected minimal MH related symptoms leading to the time of separation. The commander’s statement did not implicate a MH issue in regard to occupational functioning, and although the profile recorded S3 for cognitive disorder NOS, there was no evidence that cognitive functioning interfered with occupational or social functioning. The neuropsychological evaluation ruled out the diagnosis of cognitive disorder NOS. The SRP therefore concluded that there was insufficient evidence that any MH condition rose to the level of being unfitting at the time of separation and therefore none were subject to service disability rating. 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) AR20150002063 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1