PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            20 April 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999029275

	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.  

	Mr. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests 

3.  The applicant states 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that

5.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is apparent from the proximity of the applicant’s psychiatric hospitalization shortly after his release from active duty, as well as comments made by the VA physician who interviewed him shortly after his separation, that the applicant was suffering from bi-polar disorder as well as, to a lessor degree, symptoms which today would be diagnosed as the early stages of PTSD.

2.  Although the applicant’s final OER depicts the applicant as physically and mentally capable of performing his military duties shortly prior to his REFRAD, the statement supplied by the officer completing that OER contradicts his prior word picture.  In this regard the Board will accept that the applicant’s rater did not want to tarnish the war record of another officer who was nearing the end of his obligated active service and so did not comment on his relief from command due to his psychological inability to handle his duties.  Since the applicant’s rater’s statement to the Board is being accepted, the applicant’s physical unfitness to perform duties, a prerequisite for medical retirement, is also established.

3.  The Board accepts the applicant’s counsel’s argument that the applicant was determined medically qualified in his REFRAD medical examination and in his USAR medical examination because he denied or downplayed his mental problems.  This type of attitude was and is prevelent in the officer corps.  The fact that the applicant initially refused psychological evaluation for VA rating purposes reinforces this line of reasoning

4.  If the Board also accepts that the applicant was unfit for duty it must also establish a percentage of disability.  This is complicated by the EPTS nature of bi-polar disorders, the possibility of alcoholic related psychiatric disorders, and the appearance that the applicant’s PTSD did not fully manifest itself until after his separation.  Since the applicant’s expressed reason to have his records corrected is to have the rights and privileges of a retired officer and not for monetary gain, the Board will give the applicant the benefit of doubt and recommend that he be medically retired, rated 30 percent disabled, the lowest percentage of disability which would warrant a medical retirement.  The monetary benefit of this correction is slim if any since any retirement granted by the Board will be offset by the money he has already received from the VA.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by 

a  by showing that the action separating her from active duty on 1 September 1989 with an Honorable Discharge Certificate is void and of no force or effect;

b.  by showing that on 1 September 1989 she was physically unfit to perform the duties of her office, grade, rank or rating by reason of hyperpituitarism (pituitary basophilism, Cushing’s Syndrome) rated 100 percent disabled under VASRD code 7907; that the disability was incurred while she was entitled to receive basic pay as a member of the Regular Army; that it did not result from misconduct or willful neglect; that it was not incurred during a period of unauthorized absence; that it was not the direct result of armed conflict; and that it was not caused by an instrumentality of war; 

c.  by showing that she was relieved from active duty on 1 September 1989 by reason of physical disability rated 100 percent disabled in accordance with the VASRD; and that, effective 2 September 1989, she was permanently retired under the provisions of title 10, United States Code, section 1201, with entitlement to retired pay of the highest grade satisfactorily held within the meaning of title 10, United States Code, section 1372; and

	d.  that she be given the retired pay this correction will require, from 2 September 1989.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__wtm___  ___rwa _  ___mvt__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__________Walter T. Morrison___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029275	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000420	
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.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.