IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  7 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110013068 


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 reconsideration of the Board's previous denial of his request for: 

   a.  removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated March 2009, and all adverse information pertaining to the same from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF); and

   b.  additional days of active service time.

2.  He states:

	a.  he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) at the time of the basis for which the GOMOR was written, and as such the GOMOR was unnecessarily harsh based on his mental health condition;

   b.  his previous service of more than 30 years was without blemish to his record; and

	c.  the embarrassment of continuing to serve in the unit where he received the GOMOR caused him to request an early release from active duty (REFRAD) of 56 days.

3.  He provided:

* a self-authored statement
* a web printout of signs and symptoms of PTSD
* Headquarters, U.S. Army Infantry Center Permanent Orders 168-58
* orders to active duty
* orders releasing him from active duty
* page 2 of a VA disability rating decision
* outpatient record printed on 10 July 2010
* DA Form 31 (Request and Authority for Leave) (Post Deployment/Mobilization Respite Absence (PDMRA)) leave

4.  He provided the following from his original application:

* the subject newspaper article from Stars and Stripes
* the GOMOR
* the GOMOR appeal

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100015108, on 8 March 2011.

2.  The applicant's contention he was suffering from PTSD at the time of the basis for which the GOMOR was written, and as such the GOMOR was unnecessarily harsh based on his mental health condition, is a new argument which requires the Board to reconsider his request.

3.  His military records show he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 12 July 1978.  He served as an armor officer in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), Regular Army, and again the USAR.  He was promoted to the rank of colonel. 

4.  The original Record of Proceedings states:

   a.  An excerpt from the Stars and Stripes, dated 3 February 2009, contains a letter to the editor entitled "A user of 'mental health card.'"  It appears the applicant wrote a letter to the editor of the Stars and Stripes in response to a previously-published letter written by a U.S. Army battalion physician, stationed in Iraq.  The battalion physician stated:

   (1)  she sees the much larger problem of Soldiers using the "mental health card" to get out of duty;

   (2)  many Soldiers fabricate or exaggerate mental problems to go home or as an excuse for poor performance or criminal behavior;

   (3)  there should be few, if any, Soldiers redeployed home for mental reasons, nor should there be anybody receiving monetary compensation via medical evaluation boards;

   (4)  she cannot believe any Soldier in this conflict had sustained PTSD that would cause the Soldier not to be able to function in society or obtain employment; and 

   (5)  there are limited funds for military/Veterans Affairs medical care and millions of these dollars are spent on benefits for Soldiers with questionable mental health issues and the monies would be better spent on delivering optimal care for Soldiers actually wounded in combat and retirees.

   b.  The applicant's Letter to the Editor of the Star and Stripes in response to the above letter states:

About the ‘mental health card' (letter, January 29) regarding abuse of combat stress is right on.  We had a lieutenant colonel who was not performing her duties in any acceptable standard for a field grade officer.  When I assigned her to one of my colonels for job oversight, she began complaining about being stressed out and unable to perform her job under this officer.  We had emails from the unit she was supporting as well as co-workers, concerning her performance.  A transfer to another location would have just been transferring the problem and that was not the solution.  When she realized her performance evaluation was due, as well as her extension request, she went to the combat stress clinic, saying she was too stressed to do her work and she could not work for the colonel, who was only trying to help her learn to do her job properly.  As soon as she got back to the unit, her stress problems were immediately cleared up and she requested a new tour to Kuwait.  She had never been outside of the base camp the entire time she served in theater, more than a year and had the gall to ask for not one, but two Bronze Star Medals, one for each year in theater.

   c.  On 25 March 2009, the Commanding General (CG), U.S. Army Materiel Command - Southwest Asia, issued the applicant a GOMOR for lack of consideration towards one of his subordinates while in Iraq.  The GOMOR noted the applicant described a subordinate lieutenant colonel whom he perceived to be abusing claims of combat stress.  While the applicant may have a limited freedom of speech in the military he included enough detailed information about his subordinate that she, as well as others within the command, immediately recognized whom he was writing about. 
   d.  The CG also noted, in pertinent part, that the GOMOR was imposed as an administrative measure and not as nonjudicial punishment.

	e.  The CG admonished the applicant on the fact that his conduct was inexcusable, and caused the CG to question the applicant’s judgment and suitability to lead Soldiers.

5.  He provides a self-authored statement indicating his actions in February-March 2009 were not indicative of his otherwise exemplary performance of duty or leadership.  He states on the advice of counsel he did not initially go into details of his latest deployment, but wishes to do so now as they are key to the action that resulted in the GOMOR.

   a.  He states upon arriving in Kuwait in June 2008 he was scheduled to depart for his station in Balad, Iraq.  The entire detachment had not received any ammunition for their side arms prior to departure.  Upon arrival he was billeted in transient housing 50-100 meters from the perimeter fence. He was alone and isolated.  During the night a siren announced an incoming rocket attack.  He did not know where his unit was taken, where to seek cover, or even if he should leave his quarters as he had no ammunition with which to defend himself if it was more than just a rocket attack.  He was afraid for his life.
   
   b.  He did not realize it at the time but he had become afflicted with PTSD that first night.  He had the symptoms of depression, feeling alienated and alone, feelings of mistrust, outbursts of anger, irritability, hypervigilance, difficulty sleeping, and feeling detached from others.
   
   c.  He states he had been pressed by another colonel to upgrade the awards of two officers prior to flying to attend a meeting.  On the flight out his helicopter was diverted to pick up the remains of a fallen Soldier.  He watched the remains being brought out and his comrades saluting as the fallen Soldier was carried off in the lead helicopter.  His PTSD got the best of him and he drafted the letter to the editor of the Stars and Stripes.  Had he not been afflicted with PTSD he would not have drafted the letter.  After he sent the letter he went to the Combat Stress Clinic in Camp Victory.  Upon his return from Theater he was not properly evaluated and despite his discussing his situation with a medical representative he was not referred to a psychiatrist for treatment of the PTSD.  He was formally diagnosed with PTSD by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
   
   d.  In summary:
   
   (1)  He wrote the letter to the editor because of the symptoms he suffered from PTSD which he became afflicted with while assigned in Iraq and the hostile command environment he served in that exacerbated the symptoms.
   
   (2)  He continued to be of service to the Army while serving as a contractor and continues to be of service to his fellow Soldiers as part of the VA.
   
   (3)  He should not be punished for his affliction but shown understanding and empathy as the symptoms continue to this day.
   
   (4)  Although he served almost 400 days on active duty, 56 of those days were PDMRA and should not be included in the 400 as if he had served his complete tour, rather should have been additional days.

6.  He provided Patient Outpatient Records, dated 19 and 26 February 2009, indicating he was seen at the 98th Medical Detachment, Camp Victory.  He was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood.  He was seen at the 55th Medical Company, Camp Victory, on 12 March 2009, and was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder and with anxiety.  On all three occasions he was returned to duty.

7.  He provided a copy of a DA Form 31 showing he was on PDMRA leave during the period 22 April through 16 June 2009.

8.  His record contains U.S. Army Garrison Fort Belvoir, Orders 103-0004, dated 13 April 2009 which show he was REFRAD, effective 3 July 2009, and reassigned to the USAR Logistics Civil Augmentation Program (LOGCAP) Support Detachment.

9.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he entered active duty on 1 June 2008, and he was REFRAD on 3 July 2009, under the provisions of Army Regulation 600-8-24 (Officer Transfers and Discharges), paragraph 2-7, for completion of required active service.  He had completed 1 year, 1 month, and 3 days or 398 days of net active service this period. 

10.  He provided a VA rating decision showing he was assigned a 30 percent disability rating for PTSD effective 4 July 2009. 

11.  There is no evidence in his available military records to show he was ever diagnosed with or displayed symptoms of PTSD prior to his release from active duty.

12.  A review of the Army Human Resources Command, Integrated Web Services system shows the GOMOR and its attachments are filed in the performance portion of his OMPF.  

13.  Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) states commanders have authority to give admonitions or reprimands either as an administrative measure or as nonjudicial punishment.  It notes that a written administrative admonition or reprimand will contain a statement that it has been imposed as an administrative measure and not as punishment under Article 15.  

14.  Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information), paragraph 3-4, states a letter, regardless of the issuing authority, may be filed in the OMPF only upon the order of a general officer senior to the recipient or by direction of an officer having general court-martial jurisdiction over the individual.  Letters filed in the OMPF will be filed in the performance portion.  The direction for filing in the OMPF will be contained in an endorsement or addendum to the letter.  A letter to be included in a Soldier's OMPF will, in pertinent part: 	

	a.  contain a statement indicating it has been imposed as an administrative measure and not as a punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Article 15;
 
	b.  be signed by an officer authorized to direct such filing;
 
	c.  Be forwarded for inclusion in the performance portion of the OMPF only after considering the circumstances and alternative nonpunitive measures.  Minor behavior infractions or honest mistakes chargeable to sincere but misguided efforts will not normally be recorded in a Soldier's OMPF;
  
	d.  once filed in the OMPF such documents are permanent unless removed through the appeal process; and

	e.  Once an official document has been properly filed in the OMPF, it is presumed to be administratively correct and to have been filed pursuant to an objective decision by competent authority.  Thereafter, the burden of proof rests with the individual concerned to provide evidence of a clear and convincing nature that the document is untrue or unjust, in whole, or in part, thereby warranting its alteration or removal from the OMPF.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) prescribes the policies and mandated operating tasks for the Military Personnel Information Management/Records Program of the Military Personnel System.  Paragraph 2-4 of this regulation states once a document is placed in the OMPF it becomes a permanent part of the file and will not be removed from that file or moved to another part of the file unless directed by the proper authorities listed in the regulation.  It also states ABCMR decision documents that approve or deny a request will be filed on the restricted section of the OMPF. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends he wrote the letter to the editor because of the symptoms he suffered from PTSD which he became afflicted with while assigned in Iraq and the hostile command environment he served in that exacerbated the symptoms; he was suffering from PTSD at the time of the basis for which the GOMOR was written; and as such the GOMOR was unnecessarily harsh based on his mental health condition.  He further contends he should receive consideration for his blemish free 30-year career and understanding and empathy as the symptoms of his PTSD continue to this day.

2.  The evidence of record shows while serving in Iraq he was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood.  Consideration has been given the fact documentation he provided in behalf of his application shows he now suffers from PTSD and his contention he served in a hostile command environment that exacerbated the symptoms.  However, the documentation he submitted is insufficient proof he was suffering from PTSD while he was in the Army or that PTSD was the cause for his actions, the basis of which he was given the GOMOR.

3.  Furthermore, by his own admission he continued to be of service to the Army while serving as a contractor and continues to be of service to his fellow Soldiers as part of the VA, in spite of his current diagnosis of PTSD.  As such, even if he had PTSD at the time, he has not shown how PTSD was the cause of his action leading to his receiving a GOMOR and its subsequent filing in the performance portion of his OMPF.

4.  With regard to his contention the GOMOR was unnecessarily harsh based on his mental health condition the GOMOR was imposed as an administrative measure, not punishment under Article 15, UCMJ.  Furthermore, he has not shown how his now diagnosed PTSD or even his then diagnosis of an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood while in Iraq should excuse his actions.  As such, there is insufficient basis to support his contention that the GOMOR was disproportionate to the offense.

5.  The applicant contends although he served almost 400 days on active duty, 56 of those days were PDMRA and should not be included in the 400 as if he had served his complete tour, rather should have been additional days.  However, the orders stated he was to be mobilized in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom for a period of 400 days unless otherwise released earlier.  The period of time on mobilization orders and similar active duty orders do not guarantee this time to a Soldier and are frequently changed based on the mission or circumstances of those personnel ordered to active duty.  The fact that 56 days of his 398 days of active duty were PDMRA is immaterial.  In addition, he voluntarily requested REFRAD.  As such, there is no basis for granting the applicant any additional days of active duty.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting his request.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100015108, dated 8 March 2011.




      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20110013068



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110013068



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1