IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150006058 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 states the reason for the diagnosis of anxiety disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) needs to be corrected because the MH Review that was done on 24 June 24 2011 has a lot of incorrect information that is not consistent with the applicant’s records. The applicant further states, the on-post provider he was seeing stated that the applicant fell below retention standards and received a profile. Additionally, the on-post provider did state post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) spectrum disorder in his notes. The applicant states that Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) also diagnosed him with PTSD. 4. The applicant states that he is currently seeing a civilian provider that is treating his prolonged PTSD. 5. 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 separation determination. 2. The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of changes in diagnosis of the applicant's MH condition during processing through the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). Diagnoses of PTSD by the Department of Veterans Affairs and anxiety disorder were rendered during the IDES process. The diagnosis of PTSD was not forwarded by the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). Therefore, the applicant met the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 3. The SRP agreed that Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudication of not unfitting anxiety disorder not otherwise specified was supported by the evidence. The available treatment records did not support a PTSD diagnosis because there was no clear evidence that diagnostic criteria were met. The Service Treatment Records documented that the applicant had significant symptoms of anxiety in the form of panic attacks prior to deployment. The applicant admitted he became depressed while on leave after learning of the death of a good friend. During the Post-Deployment Health Assessment , the applicant denied combat stressors and traumatic reactions. 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. The commander’s statement indicated he was physically not capable of performing duties of his MOS but did not implicate an MH condition. The SRP concluded that no mental disorder, regardless of the diagnosis, rose to the level of unfitting. 4. 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. 5. 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) AR20150006058 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1