IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150008197 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 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 be no change of 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 military Disability Evaluation System (DES)-P (Pilot) program. The evidence of the available records recorded no inappropriate changes in diagnoses to the applicant’s possible disadvantage during the DES process. Therefore the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 3. The SRP agreed that the physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudication of unfitting post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) was supported by the evidence and the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) Section 4.129 were appropriately applied. The SRP considered if there was evidence for a VASRD Section 4.130 rating higher than 50 percent at time of placement on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). The higher 70 percent rating was for “Occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood.” Available treatment records at the time leading up to TDRL placement recorded the absence of treatment history, no use of psychotropic medication, no history of suicidal ideation, no psychiatric hospitalizations, no aggressive behaviors, no visits to the emergency room for MH issues, and no evidence of impairment in judgment or thinking. The MH condition was never profiled and no MH condition was implicated in the commander’s statement. The SRP concluded there was insufficient reasonable doubt (in accordance with VASRD Section 4.3) for recommending a 70 percent TDRL placement rating. 4. The SRP later considered the rating for TDRL removal. At the TDRL removal examination, nearly 2 years after TDRL placement, the applicant reported overall improvement in her symptoms. Her mental status examination was normal. She was a full-time student, had previously worked a part-time job, and had performed well in school and on the job. She had not received any MH care and was not prescribed psychotropic medication. She had no history of suicidal ideation, legal issues, or psychiatric hospitalization. The psychiatrist noted the applicant was stable and although she had been previously diagnosed with PTSD, many of those symptoms were absent. She reported good relationships with friends. The SRP determined that the evidence did not support a rating higher than the 30 percent rating. 5. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, and mindful of VASRD Section 4.3 (reasonable doubt), the SRP concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the MH condition at either TDRL placement or removal. 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) AR20150008197 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1