Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9207856
Original file (9207856.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests reconsideration of the Board’s decision that, in effect, denied his request for physical disability retirement or separation.

APPLICANT STATES : That he disagrees with the Board decision and that he feels that he should not have to furnish newly discovered relevant evidence (He refers to the
17 February 1995 letter to him from the Board). The applicant questions the results of the mental status examination in which it states he was alert and oriented, yet depressed, however he was mentally responsible, able to distinguish right from wrong and adhere to the right. The applicant also states that his physical and mental condition were determined 10 months prior to his discharge, and implies that no one would know his condition at the time of his discharge unless he was thoroughly examined. The applicant also claims that he suffers from post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This, and other disabilities are service connected.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION : Incorporated herein is a summarization of the applicant’s military records prepared to reflect the Board’s original consideration of his case on 1 February 1995. Also included is the 17 February 1995 letter notifying him that his application would be reconsidered only if he could present relevant evidence.

Chapter 13 Army Regulation 635-40, chapter 4, Eligibility for Disability Evaluation, paragraph 4-3, provides that an enlisted soldier may not be referred for, or continue, physical disability processing when action has been started under any regulatory provision which authorizes a characterization of service of under other than honorable conditions. The commander exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the soldier may abate the administrative separation. This authority may not be delegated. A copy of the decision, by the general court-martial convening authority (GCMCA), must be forwarded with the disability case file to the physical evaluation board. A case file may be referred in this way if the GCMCA finds that the


disability is the cause, or a substantial contributing cause, of the misconduct that might result in a discharge under other than honorable conditions, or if other circumstances warrant disability processing instead of alternate administrative action.

PTSD, an anxiety disorder, was not recognized as a
psychiatric disorder until 1980 with the publishing of
the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders (DSM) III. The condition is described in the
current DSM-IV, pages 424 through 427. While PTSD
has only been categorized by psychiatrists as a distinct
diagnosis since 1980, it has, as early as the Civil War,
been described in psychological literature, variously
labeled as shell shock, soldier's heart, effect
syndrome, combat fatigue and traumatic neurosis. During
the period of time in question, similar psychiatric
symptomatology was categorized as hysterical neurosis.
Although the current label of PTSD is of rather recent
acceptance, the idea that catastrophes and tragedies can
result in persistent emotional and psychological
symptoms is common even among the lay public. While
PTSD was not recognized as a specific illness at the
time of the applicant's separation from the service, the
fact that an individual might not be fit for further
military service because of psychosis, psychoneurosis,
or neurological disorders was outlined in Army
Regulation 40-501 which was in effect at the time of his
separation. The Army here established standards and
procedures for determining fitness for retention and
utilized those procedures and standards in evaluating
individuals at that time. The specific diagnostic label
given to an individual's condition a decade or more
after his discharge from the service may change, but any
change does not call into question the application of
then existing fitness standards.


DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1. The applicant has provided no new information, nor probative evidence, nor a convincing argument in support of this request. The physician who examined the applicant determined that while the applicant was depressed and his thinking confused, he was mentally responsible and met the medical retention standards and was qualified for separation.

2. While the applicant may now suffer from PTSD, there is no evidence of record nor has the applicant provided evidence to indicate that he suffered from a mental disorder of such severity, regardless of the diagnostic terminology in use at the time, that rendered him unable to reasonably perform the duties of his office, grade, or rank. He is therefore not entitled to physical disability retirement or separation.

3. Notwithstanding the above information, the applicant could not have been processed for physical disability retirement or separation unless approved by the officer exercising general court-martial jurisdiction over the soldier. The applicant requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of court-martial, and that request was approved by the separation authority who directed that he receive an undesirable discharge.

4. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.


DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

GRANT

GRANT FORMAL HEARING

DENY APPLICATION




                                                      Karl F. Schneider
                                                      Acting Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607940C070209

    Original file (9607940C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not have any medically unfitting disability which required physical disability processing. The VA has determined that the applicant did not have a bipolar disorder, but PTSD and has rated her 50 percent disabling because of that condition. The VA is not required to determine fitness for duty at the time of separation.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055784C070420

    Original file (2001055784C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for DVA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9711345

    Original file (9711345.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion, it is concluded: An award of a VA rating does not establish entitlement to medical retirement or separation from the Army.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060005892C070205

    Original file (20060005892C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides copies of a 12 page Mental Health Outpatient Progress Note related to his treatment for post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and a statement from his wife. While PTSD has only been categorized by psychiatrists as a distinct diagnosis since 1980, it has, as early as the Civil War, been described in psychological literature, variously labeled as shell shock, Soldier's heart, effect syndrome, combat fatigue and traumatic neurosis. There is no evidence in the available...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9606263C070209

    Original file (9606263C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The discharge authority was Army Regulation 635-120, chapter 5. Army Regulation 635-120 provides policies and procedures for separation of officers from active duty. While PTSD was not recognized as a specific illness at the time of the applicant's separation from the service, the fact that an individual might not be fit for further military service because of psychosis, psychoneurosis, or neurological disorders was outlined in Army Regulation 40-501 which was in effect at the time of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002142C070205

    Original file (20060002142C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests reconsideration of his application to correct his records by upgrading his discharge, showing entitlement for PTSD (post- traumatic stress disorder), and award of the Purple Heart. The applicant states that he suffered from PTSD as a result of being in Vietnam. While PTSD was not recognized as a specific illness at the time of the applicant's separation from the service, the fact that an individual might not be fit for further military service because of psychosis,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100020403

    Original file (20100020403.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides the following evidence in support of his request: * Veterans Services Office, Durango, Colorado letter, dated 16 December 2010 * Pathfinder Clinic, Clinical Director letter, dated 24 August 2010 * United States Army and Joint Services Records Research Center (JSRRC) Letter, dated 10 August 2010 * 29-page self-authored Statement on Stressor Events * Various military and medical records * Congressional Inquiry Packet CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 1997010596C070209

    Original file (1997010596C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his previous application to correct his records by showing he was erroneously court-martialed, erroneously discharged based on fraudulent enlistment, and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 1997010596

    Original file (1997010596.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS : Reconsideration of his previous application to correct his records by showing he was erroneously court-martialed, erroneously discharged based on fraudulent enlistment, and upgrading his discharge from a general discharge, under honorable conditions to fully honorable. On 11 August 1969 his discharge characterization was upgraded to a general discharge, under honorable conditions, by the Discharge Review Board. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007109

    Original file (20120007109.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A review of the applicant’s official records as well as the documents submitted with his application failed to show evidence that the applicant was considered for evaluation by a Medical Evaluation Board or that the applicant was diagnosed with a permanent unfitting condition. The available evidence fails to provide sufficient evidence to show he was suffering from a physically or mentally disabling condition at the time of his discharge that would have supported separation processing...