Soldier pays for armor - Army demanded $700 from city man who was wounded

WV Gazette ^ | 2/7/06

[iPod Shuffle]

February 07, 2006

Soldier pays for armor # Army demanded $700 from city man who was wounded

By Eric Eyre Staff writer

The last time 1st Lt. William “Eddie” Rebrook IV saw his body armor, he was lying on a stretcher in Iraq, his arm shattered and covered in blood.

A field medic tied a tourniquet around Rebrook’s right arm to stanch the bleeding from shrapnel wounds. Soldiers yanked off his blood-soaked body armor. He never saw it again.

But last week, Rebrook was forced to pay $700 for that body armor, blown up by a roadside bomb more than a year ago. - advertisement - Find a job today.

He was leaving the Army for good because of his injuries. He turned in his gear at his base in Fort Hood, Texas. He was informed there was no record that the body armor had been stripped from him in battle.

He was told to pay nearly $700 or face not being discharged for weeks, perhaps months.

Rebrook, 25, scrounged up the cash from his Army buddies and returned home to Charleston last Friday.

“I last saw the [body armor] when it was pulled off my bleeding body while I was being evacuated in a helicopter,” Rebrook said. “They took it off me and burned it.”

But no one documented that he lost his Kevlar body armor during battle, he said. No one wrote down that armor had apparently been incinerated as a biohazard.

Rebrook’s mother, Beckie Drumheler, said she was saddened — and angry — when she learned that the Army discharged her son with a $700 bill. Soldiers who serve their country, those who put their lives on the line, deserve better, she said.

[Terabitten]

Hey, Thunder 6, found this on page 2 and 3 of the article:

In the past, the Army allowed to soldiers to write memos, explaining the loss and destruction of gear, Rebrook said.

But a new policy required a “report of survey” from the field that documented the loss.

Rebrook said he tried to get a battalion commander to sign a waiver on the battle armor, but the officer declined. Rebrook was told he’d have to supply statements from witnesses to verify the body armor was taken from him and burned.

In other words, they told the kid that he needed to request a report of survey. The kid chose not to. He also chose not to get statements from *anyone* in his unit who could verify that the armor was taken and burned. Sounds like the Army gave the kid a decent shot at *not* paying, but for whatever reason, he chose not to do that.

[spunkets]

" Sounds like the Army gave the kid a decent shot at *not* paying, but for whatever reason, he chose not to do that."

No, they didn't. It was never the Lt's job, or responsibility to handle any of this. It is not his responsibility to handle it one year later, at the time of discharge either. What you have here is a lazy slug battalion commander that doesn't give a damn about wounded soldiers.

The vest in question was involved in an explosion that wrecked the soldier's arm, was it not? The vest is now trash due to shrapnel. Damaged vests are not reusable. Did the battalion commanded think the soldier faked the blast to steal a vest? It sure looks like it!

"He also chose not to get statements from *anyone* in his unit who could verify that the armor was taken and burned."

Yes indeed, the whole wounded in a roadside bomb story is BS. It was a gd show to steal a friggin' vest.

[Thunder 6]

It still seems strange that the ROS wasn't automatically generated by his TF, and cleared before that unit left Iraq. There is something we are not hearing about this. Really, this isn't rocket science! ;)

Regards,

[Terabitten]

It was never the Lt's job, or responsibility to handle any of this. It is not his responsibility to handle it one year later, at the time of discharge either.

Actually, yeah, it was the soldier's responsibility. It was his assigned equipment, and he is required, injured or not, to account for it. The Army gave him an opportunity to account for it in such a way that he wouldn't have to pay for it, but he chose not to do that. No one disputes that the officer in question was injured by an IED, and we all feel badly about that. However, the responsibility DOES lie on the soldier to show that he was wearing the vest at the time of the injury. A simple statement (which would be taken as a matter of course in a report of survey) would establish that fact.

The vest in question was involved in an explosion that wrecked the soldier's arm, was it not?

I would assume so. Again, a simple written statement by the officer saying that he was wearing the vest when he was wounded, and the vest was taken from him at that point, would be enough for a survey officer to write the vest off as a combat loss. The officer apparently chose not to make such a statement in writing, and instead agreed to pay $700 via statement of charges.

What you have here is a lazy slug battalion commander that doesn't give a damn about wounded soldiers.

Is there any indication that the Bn Cdr in the story was the soldier's commander in Iraq? You can't expect anyone to sign a statement that something was destroyed in combat if they weren't there. If the commander IS the same guy, I imagine he'd beat the sh*t out of you, me, or anyone else who claims he doesn't care about his wounded soldiers.

Yes indeed, the whole wounded in a roadside bomb story is BS. It was a gd show to steal a friggin' vest.

No one has said any such thing. What we have found odd is that the soldier refused to accept a simple, open-and-shut report of survey that would've taken all of an afternoon to complete.

[Terabitten]

It still seems strange that the ROS wasn't automatically generated by his TF, and cleared before that unit left Iraq.

I agree. You'd think that would've been completed in the pre-redeployment inventory process.

[jjm2111]

Not with people of his circumstances.

[Terabitten]

The stockades are full of people who told the Army to go 'f' themselves.

Hehe... I just noticed your post. I told the Army to go "f" itself all the time -- just never officially, on paper. :)

[jjm2111]

Oh please. You would be the perfect REMF. There is so little appplication of common sense within the military machine. I was deployed to Kuwait for nine months. I saw the Army waste more money on more b.s. than I thought possible. But this guy loses his body armor when he gets wounded and you think he should get his money back after he proves the circumstances that it was lost under?

Some sh-tbird supply schmuck didn't check with the guys in his company before they put this too him. Plain and simple.

[jjm2111]

I wonder if these regulations-bots also deduct the cost of missing body armor from the death benefits of soldiers who are killed in action.

What happens if the body armor failed them? Would they still have to pay for it? [/sarc]

[Centurion2000]

Lets use a little common sense.

You do realize that this IS the Army right?

[spunkets]

"Again, a simple written statement by the officer saying that he was wearing the vest when he was wounded, and the vest was taken from him at that point, would be enough for a survey officer to write the vest off as a combat loss."

It appears that writing such a statement and signing it was not enough.

"The officer apparently chose not to make such a statement in writing, and instead agreed to pay $700 via statement of charges."

I don't believe anyone in their right mind would do such a thing. I do believe that very unreasonable demands and conditions were made at the time of discharge when the Lt was to leave for home.

"Is there any indication that the Bn Cdr in the story was the soldier's commander in Iraq?"

It doesn't matter and probably not. The commander at Hood had the authority to facilitate the soldier's departure and fix the apparent problem. He refused to do so.

"What we have found odd is that the soldier refused to accept a simple, open-and-shut report of survey that would've taken all of an afternoon to complete."

More was apparently demanded than filling out a simple doc. He apparently would have to hunt down and obtain letters from others. I do not believe a West Point grad would not fill out a simple form, or write a simple letter stating that the vest was worn at the time of the explosion. I do believe he would walk away in disgust when unreasonable demands were made by a pencil dick.

[ccmay]

It is also the case that soldiers coming back from the battlefield have a hard time proving they are ill from chemicals used in the war.

At the risk of sounding callous, people get sick all the time for a myriad of reasons.

There are some veterans, many of whom never spent a day in combat, who seem to think that any illness they suffer for the rest of their lives must have been service-connected.

I wouldn't necessarily call them malingerers or frauds, because they may truly be sick or at least sincerely believe they are sick. However, when I worked in a VA hospital, I personally saw some of these guys spending an astounding amount of time and effort gaming the system to get the service-connected designation, regardless of the lack of evidence therefor.

If they worked so hard at a regular job, they'd be so successful that there would be no need of the paltry VA benefits.

-ccm

[FreedomCalls]

It's not the CO, it's the weenies over at CIF (Central Issuing Facility) that pull this crapola.

And when the CIF comes up short of equipment during its inventory then the NCOIC has to pay for it out of his pocket unless the Lt filled out the proper form. Why should the NCOIC of the CIF take the $700 hit when the Lt wouldn't sign off on the DD-200 form? The Lt chose to pay rather than wait for the form to be processed. It was his decision that he would rather pay than wait.

[jec41]

Not with people of his circumstances.

You are so wrong. The army will not discharge or release you if you owe them money. They will find some duty that you can do even if you are crippled or in the hospital and continue to pay you until you pay your debt. If you tell them to 'f' themselves and leave you are AWOL. They will come and get you,and after trial, put you in the stockade and when you get out they will give you some duty you can perform until you pay your debt. You will also owe them more money and will be fined for the time you spent telling them to 'f' themselves. Then they will decide what kind of discharge you get.

What doesn't add up is the story. I think its bogus. 1st Lt. William “Eddie” Rebrook IV is a West Point officer and has served at least 2 years to obtain his rank and makes good money. In Iraq he would be making tax free $80,000 plus a year and if not married little to spend it on. Wounded he would continue to receive his regular pay and discharged he would receive his disability pay. The article says that he was so destitute that he had to take up a collection from friends. I served during Vietnam and received disability and was recalled and had to reprove the disability. They did not recall me to serve in Vietnam but to train recruits in hand to hand combat. My son is a 1st Lt. serving in Iraq now so I speak from experience.

[jjm2111]

When I returned from Kuwait, the Navy overpaid me by almost $1000. They (and I) discovered their mistake almost 9 months later. They wanted to charge me penalties and interest for THEIR mistake. I told them that I'd repay them the money but refused to pay any penalties and interest and they backed down pretty quickly.

I meant told them to 'f' themselves in a metaphoric sense.

Even if the guy made 80gs in Iraq he still has a crippled arm and this still is one of those stupid military snafus.

[MortMan]

I was in the ADA (PATRIOT), and I don't believe I ever did a report of survey. Of course, we didn't see much shooting action in Desert Storm, though.

Thanks for the info.

[Eagles Talon IV]

You are entitled to your opinion, certainly, but your having military experience hardly qualifies you to sit in judgment of the system after hearing only one side of the story. No one argues that the military cannot be as screwed up as any private corporation and, as they say, sh*t happens. The fact remains this is the best military the world has ever seen and the dedication of the soldiers is unparalleled.

[Eagles Talon IV]

Of course your opinion is worth as much as anyone else's but maybe you ought to wait until you hear the other side of this tale. To date we have only heard the soldiers side.

Soldiers know going in they are responsible for their equipment and a procedure is in place in the eventuality some or all of it is lost or damaged. The procedure simply needs to be followed and if a medic or other soldier was lax in completing necessary paperwork then there are also rules in place for him/her to be disciplined.

The answer is certainly not to say "a soldier is hurt, throw the regs in the garbage."

[steve-b]

Puh-leeze. The REMFs responsible for this snafu wouldn't lift a finger to fix it unless bad publicity spurred somebody higher up the food chain to light a fire under their sorry butts.

[Eagles Talon IV]

"You don't get to tell the other side of the story. The vest is trash, since it was hit with shrapnel a year prior when the soldier was in the explosion."

What you are saying in fact is the other side of the story, as you understand it. However the problem is it came from the soldier and not the military command involved.