SUPPLIMENTAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 2 MAY 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20040009617
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual. A quorum was present during the
further consideration and deliberation. The findings appearing in
proceedings dated
16 December 2003 and 24 March 2004, were affirmed. The following
additional findings, conclusions, and recommendations were adopted by the
Board.
| |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | |Director |
| |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | |Senior Analyst |
The Board convened at the call of the Director on the above date to
reconsider the conclusions and recommendation appearing in proceedings
dated 16 December 2003 and 24 March 2004.
| |Mr. Fred Eichorn | |Chairperson |
| |Mr. Thomas O'Shaughnessy | |Member |
| |Ms. Marla Troup | |Member |
The Board considered the following additional evidence:
Exhibit C – (show the identifying data for the original Record of
Proceedings)
CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE:
35. On 1 July 2005 new information was received from the applicant’s
counsel in regard to the decision of the Army Board for Correction of
Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR2002076652, dated 16 December
2003, and in the initial Supplemental Proceedings in Docket
NumberAR2004103034, dated
24 March 2004.
36. The evidence submitted consists of counsel’s statement that the
Board’s original proceedings “voided” the applicant’s “General Discharge of
21 Oct 1975” and then permanently retired him retroactive to the 1975
discharge date.” However, when the new separation document was issued it
failed to show that the applicant was honorably discharged.
37. Counsel argued that the Board’s 2003 decision “implicitly set aside
the 1975 GD [general discharge] by concluding that “the action separating
the individual concerned from active duty on 21 October 1975 is void and of
no force or effect.” And then transferred the applicant to the permanent
disability retired list (PDRL) “for a disability ‘not the result of
misconduct’.” He noted that the Board found that the applicant was
suffering from posttraumatic stress disorder at the time of his original
discharge but that “Army psychiatrists had erroneously concluded his
condition was a personality disorder.” He argues that the Board’s “PDRL
transfer then flows from its voiding of the charges and process that led to
the GD.”
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
13. At the time of the decision of the ABCMR in Docket Number
AR2002076652, dated 16 December 2003, and the initial Supplemental
Proceedings in Docket NumberAR2004103034, dated 24 March 2004, it was the
intent of the ABCMR to make the applicant’s record as administratively
correct as it should properly have been at the time.
14. The ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR2002076652 failed to
specifically state that in addition to voiding the applicant’s 1975
discharge action, the characterization of his service as a result of being
retired by of physical disability should have been shown as honorable.
15. In the Board’s original proceedings it was concluded that the evidence
showed that the applicant was an outstanding Soldier, that he performed his
duties well, was promoted to the rank of sergeant first class, and was not
involved in any recorded misconduct prior to the night he and his spouse
were involved in an altercation which led to his voluntary discharge under
Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10. The Board then went on to conclude,
in effect, that the more appropriate disposition of the applicant should
have been via disability channels and recommended correction of his records
accordingly; however, omitting a specific statement regarding the
characterization of the applicant’s service. When the applicant’s new
separation document was issued in July 2004 it reflected the original
characterization of “under honorable conditions (general).”
16. Therefore, the applicant’s 1975 revised separation document, issued in
July 2004, should be corrected to show that his service was characterized
as honorable.
BOARD VOTE:
__FE ___ ___TO __ ___MT__ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
amendment of the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military
Records set forth in Docket Number AR2002076652, dated 2 February 2004, and
the initial Supplemental Proceedings in Docket NumberAR2004103034, dated
24 March 2004, to show that the applicant’s service upon retirement as a
result of physical disability was honorable.
______ Fred Eichorn_______
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
|CASE ID |AR20040009617 |
|SUFFIX | |
|RECON |YYYYMMDD |
|DATE BOARDED |20050602 |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE |YYYYMMDD |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY |AR . . . . . |
|DISCHARGE REASON | |
|BOARD DECISION |GRANT |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
|ISSUES 1. |110.00 |
|2. | |
|3. | |
|4. | |
|5. | |
|6. | |
-----------------------
[pic]
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076652C070215
An Army psychiatrist at the Fort Campbell US Army Hospital stipulated the applicant was medically qualified to return to duty, but also recommended he not be exposed to further combat and that he be restricted to assignments within the United States not involving basic combat training. On 27 January 1989, the VA found the applicant to be 100 percent disabled due to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In the processing of this case, a medical advisory opinion was obtained from the United...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006161C070206
The applicant also requests that the revised 1975 separation document, issued in July 2004 as a result of the Board’s December 2003 decision, be corrected to show that his MOS (military occupational specialty) titles in item 11 (Primary Specialty) were “Office Manager” vice Admin Specialist and Medical Records Specialist. He requests that the separation document be corrected to show award of the Career Counselor Badge, an Air Medal, and the Purple Heart. numbers, showing completion of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060014524
Counsel states that the applicant was separated from active duty on 15 October 2004, after 1 year, 8 months, and 13 days following a National Guard mobilization. According to Title 10, USC, section 1201, for a member on active duty for more than 30 days who is unfit because of physical disability, the Department Secretary may retire the member, with retired pay, if the member has at least 20 years of service computed under section 1208 of this title, or if the disability is at least thirty...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050008088C070206
Michael J. Flynn | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that military members on active duty could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents. DIC also may be authorized for survivors of veterans who at the time of death were determined to be totally disabled as a result of military service,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008938
His discharge resulted in a general under honorable conditions characterization of service, which is inappropriate for the following reasons: * He suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) during and after his three combat tours in Vietnam * He was being treated and assessed for mental and emotional problems in the years prior to his final discharge from service * His mental and emotional problems, which stemmed from his PTSD, made further service in the Army impossible * At the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110008700
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records set forth in Docket Number AR20110000098, dated 24 January 2011, by replacing paragraph 1a and 1b of the original BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION with the following paragraphs: Paragraph 1a - "retroactively placing the individual concerned on the TDRL for a minimum of six months at no less than 50 percent disability rating for PTSD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | AR20110013633
On 1 February 2011, new information was received from the United States Army Physical Disability Agency (USAPDA) in regard to the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100029393 dated 24 January 2011. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100029393 dated 24 January 2011, by replacing paragraph 1a and 1b of the original BOARD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110002777
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records set forth in Docket Number AR20100025221, dated 3 December 2010, by replacing paragraph 1a and 1b of the original BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION with the following paragraphs: Paragraph 1a - "retroactively placing the individual concerned on the TDRL for a minimum of six months at no less than 50 percent disability rating for PTSD...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02236
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant summarized the information contained in the applicant’s personnel and medical records and states that the applicant’s condition of cognitive impairment is permanent, but is not judged to be stable, and does not meet or exceed a disability rating of 80 percent. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089956C070403
The applicant requests that his 30 April 1983 separation for permanent physical disability (10%) with entitlement to severance pay be changed to retirement at a rate of 40% disability. The PEB recommended that he be placed on the TDRL with a disability rating of 80%. The findings and recommendations of the PEB were approved and on 30 April 1983, the applicant was separated by reason of physical disability at a rate of 10%.