IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005863 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 a 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 the applicant's MH condition during processing through the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). The evidence of the available records shows the medical evaluation board (MEB) diagnoses of adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) diagnoses of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and depressive disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) were rendered during the IDES process. The SRP concluded the applicant’s case did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 3. The SRP considered the adjustment disorder was the diagnosis consistently recorded from 15 January 2009 by his treating psychiatrist, including two visits 1-2 months prior to the MEB. The narrative summary (NARSUM) examiner acknowledged some past ambiguity in support of other diagnoses, but still considered adjustment disorder to be the most accurate diagnosis based on an interview and record review that included the VA exam. 4. The SRP also considered whether any mental condition, regardless of specific diagnosis, was unfitting for continued military service. The SRP’s charge with respect to the MH conditions referred for review that were determined to be not unfitting by the physical evaluation board (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. In this case, the PEB adjudicated the adjustment disorder as a condition not constituting a physical disability in accordance with Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1332.38. However, even conceding the issue of whether the condition constituted a physical disability or whether any other MH disorder such as GAD, depression or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was present, the SRP agreed that the preponderance of evidence of the record reflected non-limiting MH symptoms. During the period of time leading into the MEB, there were no psychiatric emergency visits, no suicidal or homicidal thoughts, no legal issues, no reports of domestic violence, and no psychiatric hospitalizations. The commander’s statement did not implicate a MH condition as a cause of duty impairment. No MH condition was profiled or judged to fail retention standards. There was no indication from the record that any MH condition significantly interfered with satisfactory duty performance. 5. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient evidence that any MH condition rose to the level of being unfitting at the time of separation and none were subject to service disability rating. 6. 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) AR20150005863 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1