Judge Orders Army to Reassess Discharge

PHOTO CAPTION: Fort Benning, Georgia, where former Army PV2 William B. Peterson III served before his 2009 administrative separation. A federal judge has ordered the Army Board for Correction of Military Records to reconsider whether Peterson should have been referred into the military disability system. (Fort Benning Public Affairs Office/Public Domain)

The Army discharged William B. Peterson III in 2009 for a **“CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY.”**

Seventeen years later, a federal judge has ordered the Army to take another look at whether Peterson should have gone through the military disability system instead.

The reason is buried in Peterson’s own Army medical records.

Less than three weeks before his discharge, an Army separation examination diagnosed him with depression, anxiety and insomnia, assigned him a psychiatric PULHES score indicating that significant limitations could be required, and concluded:

**“IS NOT QUALIFIED FOR SERVICE.”**

Peterson was never referred into the Army’s Disability Evaluation System.

And when the Army Board for Correction of Military Records later considered whether that should have happened, a federal judge found that the board repeatedly failed to meaningfully address that medical examination — and repeatedly listed it as having occurred in the wrong year.

The case gets stranger from there.

Peterson entered active duty in July 2008 and served as a 25U signal support specialist at Fort Benning, Georgia, after completing basic training at Fort Knox.

According to the court record, Peterson began experiencing serious mental-health problems during his short Army career. He went absent without leave twice, sought mental-health treatment and was hospitalized after a suicide attempt in April 2009.

By May, medical personnel had concluded that he was struggling to adapt to continued military service.

The Army began processing him for administrative separation under a regulation covering physical or mental conditions that interfere with duty.

But on May 28, 2009, Peterson underwent a formal pre-separation medical examination.

That examination documented depression, anxiety and insomnia.

It also assigned him a psychiatric **PULHES score of 3**.

PULHES is the Army system used to record medical fitness in several areas. A score of 1 represents a high level of fitness. A score of 3 indicates a condition that may require **significant limitations**.

Most importantly, the examining physician marked Peterson:

**“IS NOT QUALIFIED FOR SERVICE.”**

Five days later, however, another Army record listed Peterson’s psychiatric PULHES score as 1 — the highest fitness category — and incorrectly stated that his last physical examination had been in 2007.

Peterson continued through administrative separation.

He was discharged June 17, 2009.

His DD-214 listed the reason as:

**“CONDITION, NOT A DISABILITY.”**

He never received a Medical Evaluation Board or Physical Evaluation Board to determine whether his condition made him eligible for military disability benefits.

Years later, the Department of Veterans Affairs reached a dramatically different conclusion.

Peterson eventually received a **100% service-connected disability rating for major depressive disorder**.

In 2024, the Board of Veterans’ Appeals determined that the proper effective date for that disability was **June 18, 2009 — the day after Peterson left the Army.**

That does not automatically mean the Army was required to medically retire him.

The VA and the military use different standards.

The VA determines whether conditions are connected to military service and how much they impair a veteran’s civilian earning capacity. The military disability system determines whether a service member was medically fit to continue performing military duties and, when appropriate, whether separation or retirement for disability is warranted.

But Peterson argued that the Army never properly gave him that second determination at all.

He eventually asked the Army Board for Correction of Military Records to change his records and consider him for disability retirement.

The board granted some relief.

It upgraded Peterson’s discharge characterization to honorable and changed his separation code.

But it rejected his request for disability retirement.

The Army Review Board Agency concluded there was insufficient evidence that Peterson’s mental-health condition failed Army retention standards.

That conclusion caught the attention of U.S. Court of Federal Claims Judge Armando Bonilla.

The board’s analysis had not meaningfully addressed the May 28 medical examination saying Peterson was **not qualified for service** and giving him a psychiatric PULHES score of 3.

Worse, the Army board listed that examination as occurring on **May 28, 2008** instead of May 28, 2009.

That mattered because the actual examination occurred immediately before Peterson was separated from the Army.

Peterson applied again.

According to the federal court, the subsequent Army review once again failed to address the psychiatric PULHES-3 finding and **again listed the medical examination as occurring in 2008 instead of 2009.**

That was a major problem.

Army regulations in effect at the time stated that soldiers who did not meet medical-retention standards and were already pending administrative separation were to be referred to a Medical Evaluation Board.

Those regulations also generally gave disability processing precedence over administrative separation.

Bonilla wrote that, based on Peterson’s May 28 examination and the rules then in effect, referral into the disability system was **“seemingly required.”**

The judge said he could not determine why Peterson had not been referred for an MEB and, if appropriate, a later Physical Evaluation Board.

The Army correction board had failed to adequately explain it.

On Sept. 9, the court vacated the board’s December 2025 denial of Peterson’s disability-retirement claim and sent the case back.

The Army Board for Correction of Military Records now has **120 days** to reconsider whether Peterson should receive a retroactive referral into the military disability-evaluation system.

If it denies him again, the board must specifically address that May 28, 2009 medical examination and explain why it does or does not warrant a disability referral.

The ruling does **not** mean Peterson has been awarded a medical retirement.

That decision remains unresolved.

But after years of Army reviews, a federal judge has now forced the service to confront an apparent contradiction that had been sitting in its own records since 2009:

The Army discharged Peterson for a **“condition, not a disability.”**

Its own doctor had just marked him **not qualified for service**.

And the VA later concluded that his major depressive disorder was **100% service-connected disabled effective the very next day after he left the Army.**

(Source: OAF Nation)