IN THE CASE OF: ` BOARD DATE: 12 May 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150006049 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 reviewed the records for evidence of inappropriate changes in diagnosis of the applicant's MH condition during processing through the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). The evidence of the available records showed the diagnoses of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); bipolar disorder, not otherwise specified (NOS); and adjustment disorder with mixed emotional features were rendered during processing through the IDES. The SRP agreed there were no inappropriate changes in diagnoses 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 noted the applicant endorsed several symptoms consistent with PTSD and PTSD was the likely diagnosis; however, there was a general absence of clinical documentation to make the determination that the applicant fully met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria for PTSD. The SRP concluded, based on the evidence, the diagnosis of PTSD was the likely diagnosis, the Physical Evaluation Board determined the condition was unfitting, and application of the provisions of Department of Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) section 4.129 was correct (Mental disorders due to traumatic stress) at Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) entry. 4. The SRP acknowledged the Department of the Veterans Affairs examiner’s assessment of bipolar disorder, NOS and noted the applicant had a few symptoms consistent with a bipolar condition; however, there was insufficient clinical evidence to support the diagnosis. The evidence did not clearly demonstrate that the clinical presentation recorded at the compensation & pension mental evaluation was not the result of biological agents such as anti-depressant or pain medication. The applicant was prescribed anti-depressants and pain medication. 5. The SRP concluded there was insufficient evidence that the applicant met DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for a bipolar spectrum disorder. The SRP considered if there was evidence for a VASRD section 4.130 rating higher than 50 percent at time of placement on the TDRL. The higher 70 percent rating is for “Occupational and social impairment, with deficiencies in most areas, such as work, school, family relations, judgment, thinking, or mood.” 6. After due deliberation in consideration of the preponderance of the evidence, the SRP concluded the record in evidence best supported the 50 percent rating for TDRL entry and there was insufficient evidence for recommending a 70 percent TDRL entry rating. There was no evidence of TDRL removal. 7. 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) AR20150006049 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1