| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Ronald E. Blakely | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his request for an upgrade of his dishonorable discharge.
APPLICANT STATES: That he was recently diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) related to his service in Vietnam. He feels his PTSD was not taken into consideration when his earlier request was denied. He provides the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) rating decision and report of examination as supporting evidence.
COUNSEL CONTENDS: That PTSD was not widely diagnosed or understood at the time of the applicant’s conviction and discharge. The applicant reacted in a split moment to a man holding a gun to his face. The applicant’s first shot was instinctive. The second and third shots were intentional but occurred directly after the intense situation in which he could have lost his life. He was in shock, not in a sound or normal state of mind, and still acting out of instinct and panic when he fired those other shots. Counsel contends that there was a relationship between his actions and his PTSD.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 15 September 1999 (docket number AR1999023484).
Effective 5 December 1996, the VA awarded the applicant a 30 percent disability rating for PTSD.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. The evidence provided shows that the VA awarded the applicant a disability rating for PTSD effective 5 December 1996. The evidence does not show that the applicant’s PTSD manifested itself during or before the incident for which he was court-martialed in 1973.
2. Counsel brings up a credible point that the applicant was in shock, not in a sound or normal state of mind, and still acting out of instinct and panic when he fired the second and third shots. However, that is a contention that relates to evidentiary matters which should have been brought up in the trial and/or finally and conclusively adjudicated in the court-martial appellate process and furnishes no basis for recharacterization of the discharge.
3. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments, are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
4. 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
__kak___ __reb___ __teo___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001064395 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011211 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | DD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 19740611 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 105.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010831C070208
He was issued a physical profile for right knee pain, panic disorder and PTSD and was scheduled for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The VA may find a Soldier unfit by reason of service-connected disability and may even initially assign a higher rating. While the applicant was found unfit for duty due to his knee injury and was assigned a disability rating of 10% for that unfitting condition, at the time of his PEB hearing it was determined that his diagnosis for PTSD and other related...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088561C070403
Counsel also states that the applicant was seen by the VA and was rated as 100 percent disabled effective 12 October 1999. Physical evaluation boards are established to evaluate all cases of physical disability equitability for the soldier and the Army. Operating under its own policies and regulations, the VA, which has neither the authority nor the responsibility for determining medical unfitness for military duty, awards ratings because a medical condition is related to service...
AF | PDBR | CY2010 | PD2010-00029
While he was being treated for these injuries he reported panic attacks, nightmares, and difficulty sleeping and was referred to mental health for evaluation. No evidence this condition was unfitting at the time of separation from service. The Board also considered the condition of Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and unanimously determined that this condition was not unfitting at the time of separation from service and therefore no disability rating is applied.
AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00470
The principle of rating all mental health symptoms under the predominate diagnosis is endorsed and there is no evidence in the record that CI's impairment due to different diagnoses can be specifically separated. The LCSW noted a decrease in panic attacks to 1x/week, and the VA noted that the CI had self-discontinued medications as not helping and making him feel worse and noted impaired interpersonal interactions. The Board determined that at the time of separation, the CI's clinical...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007633
The applicant requests that his disability with severance pay discharge be changed to a medical retirement. On 8 August 2005, an MEB referred the applicant to a PEB for diagnoses of: (1) PTSD, chronic, combat related; (2) sensor neural hearing loss, bilateral; (3) cervical spondylosis without myelopathy; (4) agoraphobia without panic disorder (medically acceptable); (5) partner relationship problems (medically acceptable); and (6) nicotine dependence (medically acceptable). On 21 February...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072677C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. At the time of the separation physical examination, competent medical authority determined that the applicant was then medically fit for retention or appropriate separation. The applicant’s claim that he now has PTSD because of his experiences in Vietnam is not supported by any evidence in his record, nor has the applicant submitted any evidence thereof.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015774
Counsel provides the following in his written brief, in effect stating: * the applicant filed an application for CRSC; after multiple decisions, HRC partially granted his request, but denied compensation for PTSD and tinnitus * the applicant served honorably in the Army, citing the four DD Forms 214 * he was referred into the Army's PDES and, on 29 August 2011, a formal PEB found his left knee injury and migraine headaches to be combat-related; he was medically retired on 29 January 2012 *...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120020058
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides in support of her application: * statement from a retired U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) major * Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) documents * DA Form 3349, dated 8 August 2003 * Two DD Forms 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * National Guard Bureau (NGB) 22 (Report of Separation and Record of Service) * NGB Form 55 (Discharge Certificate) * Clinical Assessment...
AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00291
Mental Health Condition . The Board noted the CI honorably separated in 2003 and was rated 10% by the VA for panic disorder and reenlisted one month later without disclosing his mental health condition. The Board does not have the authority under DoDI 6040.44 to render fitness or rating recommendations for any conditions not considered by the DES.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003087718C070212
The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was originally processed through the PDES and placed on the TDRL with a 30% disability rating for a PTSD condition based on an evaluation of a PEB. The medical evidence of record confirms that the applicant displayed the same basic symptoms during his final PEB evaluation in 2002 as he did when he was originally rated and placed on the TDRL in 1998. Thus, his record should be corrected to show his PTSD condition was rated at 30%, rather...