[beriarele]

WTF? I've never heard of this. Maybe some of the vets on here can tell us if this is SOP. This just isn't right.

PORTLAND, Ore. -- Gary Pfleider II served his country for six years before he became a member of the new generation of disabled veterans.

Pfleider, a former Oregon National Guard soldier, was shot by a sniper while on patrol in Iraq in September 2007. He has only vague memories of the event, but now must live with a permanent reminder -- a brace he'll have to wear on his leg for the rest of his life.

"I remember grabbing a hold of my leg, and realizing I had blood on my hands," he said. "And from that point on until I got loaded onto the Stryker was just a big blur."

Three days after he was shot, Pfleider received a Purple Heart.

Almost two years later, he received a bill from the military for missing equipment.

The sum of the bill, which includes interest, is $3,175. It itemizes a list of gear the military issued to Pfleider that did not come back with his unit in 2008. The lists includes clothing items, canteens and grenades.

Pfleider, who now walks with a cane, believes the items were lost after he was flown out of the country for medical treatment. He doesn't believe he should be held responsible for the items, but the military disagrees.
More here: Soldier shot in Iraq billed for missing military gear | KOMO News - Breaking News, Sports, Traffic and Weather - Seattle, Washington | Local & Regional

[palantownia]

well, the equipment is issued to you and you are responsible for it if lost or stolen, to bad his buddies didn't cover his azz, like they should have.

[Hmwmzian]

It seems pretty standard that he'd be charged.

Military are frequently charged for lost, damaged, or destroyed equipment for which they are responsible. So frequently that there's even an official form (DD Form 362: Statement of Charges) for the purpose.

As far as whether or not charging Pfleider in this instance is appropriate, it's hard to say based on the article.

The article doesn't include a link to the Statement of Charges, it doesn't indicate what happened to Pfleider between the time he was shot and the time he was flown back to the US, it doesn't indicate where or when the equipment went missing. In short, it doesn't provide any of the information that would be necessary to determine whether or not Gary Pfleider should reasonably be expected to bear the expense of the lost gear.

If Pfeider "lost" this gear because he had his TA50 cut off of him on the battlefield and was immediately medevaced to a field hospital and then directly back to Germany or the U.S. then I agree the charges are inappropriate.

But the article doesn't say that.

The article doesn't say anything at all about the actual circumstances of this incident.

It's very possible that Pfeider is getting screwed, or at the least he's getting jerked around a little because I have no doubt that if he actually has a legitimate claim it'll eventually get taken care of in his favor.

It's also very possible that Pfeider lost the equipment he's being charged for two weeks before he was wounded and is trying to use his wound as an excuse not to pay for gear he is, by all rights, responsible for.

I'd like to see the full details.

[Kiariitf]

I wonder if he's contacted anyone about it. I would think these bills are generated automatically, w/o the computer being able to account for extenuating circumstances. Seems like if he talks to someone he could get the charges waived.

[UpperMan]

If he is telling the truth then it is a pretty simple fix. He just needs to go back to his old unit and have them file the paperwork stating the equipment was lost/destroyed due to combat action.

[NodePark]

It's a paperwork problem, which has happened before IIRC. Sure, it's annoying, but it will get sorted out.

Yeah, it's happened before: CNN.com - Hurt soldier billed for gear to be repaid - Feb 8, 2006

Matt

[eI7iqNot]

Now that this has hit the media, his congressman and or senator will get involved and the paperwork will catch up with the facts and the equipment will be written off.

My guess is that it happens a lot, war zones are not the most reliable places to make sure that all the paperwork is processed before you are medicinally evacuated and sooner or later some accounting clerk does his job and files for the repayment of items not properly written off and this brings things to a head and then the write offs get completed and the issue dies.

All it proves is that the military is a large bureaucracy and sometimes stupid things happen in a large bureaucracy.

Not really an item worthy of discussion unless someone wants to blame Obama because it happened while he was Commander in Chief and then someone will weigh in with the fact that it happened under Bush as well and the flame war will begin all over again.

[Dvjkefdw]

All it proves is that the military is a large bureaucracy and sometimes stupid things happen in a large bureaucracy.

I wish this thing only happened "sometimes". It would make my life a lot easier.

[casinobonusfrees]

WTF? I've never heard of this. Maybe some of the vets on here can tell us if this is SOP. This just isn't right.




More here: Soldier shot in Iraq billed for missing military gear | KOMO News - Breaking News, Sports, Traffic and Weather - Seattle, Washington | Local & Regional

It happened on GW Bush's watch - what do you expect? Ya gots to be tough on those wounded vets or they will just take advantage. That good ole GW is watchin' out fer us Amerikins and our tax dollars, you betcha.

[cigsstorenick]

I wonder if he's contacted anyone about it. I would think these bills are generated automatically, w/o the computer being able to account for extenuating circumstances. Seems like if he talks to someone he could get the charges waived.

Not exactly automatically, but the people who would ultimately be responsible for originating the message to charge the Soldier (and I say "Soldier" here because Pfeider was one, but this is probably true for all services) wouldn't be the people who knew him personally and knew he was wounded.

Uniforms, field gear, and the like are issued to the individual Soldier by an entity called the Central Issue(ing) Facility (CIF) on each individual Post. When a Soldier arrives on a new Post (s)he in-processes through CIF and draws whatever gear that Soldier's parent unit's TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment) says (s)he should draw. The Soldier signs some kind of statement of responsibility (I don't know the DD/DA form name or number) which includes an itemized list of the gear being issued. When the Soldier out-processes off of a Post (s)he returns the issued gear to CIF and is released from responsibility. If a Soldier doesn't return some item of clothing or equipment the Soldiers and civilians working at the CIF originate the DD Form 362: Statement of Charges.

In Pfeider's case the argument would be that the ball got dropped somewhere along the line.

Maybe his parent unit didn't return some gear and didn't inform CIF that it was lost on the battlefield. Maybe they did, but Pfeider's buddies rat-fucked his gear (picked through it and took what they wanted) before the chain-of-command was able to gather and return it. Maybe someone at CIF lost or failed to process the form that the unit submitted informing them that the Soldier's gear was lost in combat.

In all events the ball got dropped somewhere and CIF issued a Statement of Charges (SoC) which was eventually processed through the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) which is responsible for paying and/or withholding pay from service-members; they'd also be responsible for garnishing his income tax return. DFAS has NO idea who Pfeider is or what his circumstances are, other than as an SSN they're required to cut a check for each month. Someone at DFAS would have received the Statement of Charges on Pfeider (or some form of notification to charge the Soldier consequent to the SoC having been originated) and put a check in a box in a database. From that point forward things would have been automatic, but the error was really made before it got to that point.

Any number of things could have happened. But this wasn't a computer error, it was a human error by someone. And of course those happen and can be corrected, which I have no doubt in this case it will.

On the other hand, maybe Pfeider is sitting at home with a box of gear in the closet (I know someone else who might be ).

[sleelverrex]

It happened on GW Bush's watch - what do you expect? Ya gots to be tough on those wounded vets or they will just take advantage. That good ole GW is watchin' out fer us Amerikins and our tax dollars, you betcha.

Sorry, but the administration in charge has absolutely nothing to do with this kind of thing.

I have served under 5 different presidents now, both Democrat and Republican. And at this level, the president has absolutely nothing to do with this at all. Odds are, it is just paperwork finally catching up.

When you deploy, you get extra equipment. And either you personally or your unit signs for it, and you then sign it from your unit. And it has to ba accounted for somehow.

As has been stated before, a "Statement Of Charges" is par for the course if you loose equipment, no matter how it was lost. You may have dropped it, sold it, thrown it away, had it stollen, or even had it destroyed (a friend of mine had his ESAPI plates destroyed when a 5-ton truck ran over them).

And in the same way, individuals and commanders can simply fill out the paperwork declairing them to be a "Field Loss". The Commander simply fills out a memo describing what was lost, and how it was lost. This may be for rifle magazines dropped during a firefight, body armou cut off when an individual is wounded, or a truck that is hit by an IED.

All the individual should need to do is call or write his unit and have the appropriate memo filled out. It is a routine matter. The reason these individuals get the charges is simply because it has taken time for the civilian bean-counters to catch up on their work, and it pleases them to "stick it to the military".