BOARD DATE: 25 November 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018730 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 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 retirement determination. 2. The SRP considers the appropriateness of changes in the applicant's MH diagnoses and the appropriateness of Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) fitness determination for any MH condition. If the SRP, based on a preponderance of performance-based evidence, judges that an MH condition was unfairly characterized as not unfitting by the Service, it further considers whether the provisions of Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 were applicable and makes recommendations for said ratings in accordance with VASRD section 4.130. 3. The SRP noted that the DD Form 2808 (Report of Medical Examination) did not note any diagnosis of a MH condition. The psych narrative summary listed a diagnosis of major depression (MD), recurrent, existed prior to service, service aggravated. The Medical Evaluation Board forwarded MD as medically unacceptable and the PEB adjudicated the MD condition as noted above. Therefore, the applicant did not meet the inclusion criteria in the Terms of Reference of the MH Review Project. 4. The SRP noted that the VA Compensation and Pension examination 3 months prior to separation diagnosed Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) related to combat events and indicated that the diagnosis met all the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. The SRP considered that the preponderance of evidence in the service treatment record did not support a diagnosis of PTSD. Therefore, the SRP agreed there is insufficient evidence to recommend a change of the Service conferred MH diagnosis. 5. The SRP next addressed the application of VASRD section 4.129 in its recommendations, noting that VASRD section 4.129 does not specify a diagnosis of PTSD; rather, it states “mental disorder due to a highly stressful event.” The SRP majority agreed that there was not sufficient evidence to support a conclusion that a highly-stressful event severe enough to bring about the applicant’s release from active military service occurred and that the application of VASRD section 4.129 is not appropriate in this case. 6. The SRP next deliberated the rating of the MH condition at separation. The SRP consensus was that the evidence at separation most closely met the 50 percent rating in accordance with VASRD section 4.130, specified as “occupational and social impairment with reduced reliability and productivity.” 7. After due deliberation in consideration of the evidence, the SRP concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB’s disability and retirement determination. 8. 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) AR20140018730 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1