BOARD DATE: 5 January 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150018450 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 a 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 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 should be no change to the applicant’s disability and separation determination. 2. The SRP considered the appropriateness of changes in MH diagnoses, physical evaluation board (PEB) fitness determination; and if unfitting, whether the provisions of the Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 were applicable, and a disability rating recommendation in accordance with VASRD section 4.130. The SRP first acknowledged that the diagnosis of anxiety disorder and major depression was clearly documented during the disability evaluation system (DES) process beginning at the time of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination in May 2011 and continuing through the service’s diagnostic variance summary in November 2011. Therefore, the SRP concluded that the applicant’s case did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 3. The SRP devoted careful attention to the issue of the varying diagnoses rendered during the DES process and deliberated the most accurate depiction of the applicant’s MH condition near the time of service separation. The SRP charge in this case is the correct identification of a psychiatric condition (if one existed prior to the time of service separation) and knowing its functional impact in order to determine if it was unfitting and ratable. The SRP agreed that the service authored Behavioral Health Retention Assessment (BHRA) (diagnostic variance) was more closely related in time to separation relative to the VA examination and therefore a greater degree of probative value was given to the service assessment. 4. The SRP agreed that the evidence of record reflected minimal adverse MH symptoms and reasonably good duty performance (as related to mental functioning) in the period of time leading into the medical evaluation board (MEB). The sole minimal objective finding of a “down mood” on the VA examination did not itself indicate the presence of a MH diagnosis, and it appeared that the original MH diagnoses were based upon uncorroborated subjective history. In view of the continuance of an S1 profile, the SRP concluded that any anxiety and or depressive symptoms, although mildly troublesome, did not appear to significantly impact the applicant’s social and occupational functioning and therefore no MH condition was unfitting. 5. After due deliberation and based on the totality of the record, the SRP concluded that the PEB’s adjudication rating only for the non-MH condition was appropriate. 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) AR20150018450 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1