BOARD DATE: 15 October 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140015773 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 mental health diagnosis was changed during that process. 3. The applicant submitted an application through the DOD Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) Mental Health 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 mental health 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 mental health 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 of the applicant’s disability and separation determination. 2. The SRP reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in the diagnosis of the MH condition during processing through the military Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). Diagnoses of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), chronic (medical evaluation board (MEB) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)) and major depressive disorder (MDD) (VA) were rendered during the IDES process. The diagnosis of MDD was not forwarded by the MEB; however, this was not to the applicant’s disadvantage because the MDD symptomatology was subsumed into the PTSD diagnosis and rated in accordance with (IAW) the unified VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) schedule of rating--mental disorders. The SRP agreed there were no inappropriate changes in diagnosis and, therefore, determined that the MH diagnoses were not changed to the applicant’s possible disadvantage in the disability evaluation. Therefore, the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 3. The SRP agreed that physical evaluation board (PEB) adjudication of unfitting PTSD, chronic was supported by the evidence and the appropriate diagnosis. The SRP noted that the provisions of VASRD Section 4.129 (mental disorders due to traumatic stress) were appropriately applied in this case. The SRP considered if there was evidence for a VASRD Section 4.130 rating higher than 70 percent at time of placement on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). The higher 100 percent rating was for “total occupational and social impairment.” Available treatment records at the time leading up to TDRL entry recorded no persistent delusions or hallucinations, no gross impairment in thought processes or communication, no intermittent inability to perform activities of daily living, no disorientation to time or place, no memory loss of names of close relatives, own occupation, or own name, and no grossly inappropriate behavior. The commander noted that the applicant was able to perform some of his duties, although he did not perform them well, was not deployable, and should not be retained. 4. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient reasonable doubt (IAW VASRD Section 4.3) for recommending a 100 percent TDRL entry rating and that the record in evidence best supported a 70 percent TDRL entry rating. The applicant remained on the TDRL; therefore, a TDRL exit rating was not recommended at this time. 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 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) AR20140015773 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1