MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 4 November 1998 DOCKET NUMBER: AC97-08342 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any) APPLICANT REQUESTS: That he be given a medical retirement. APPLICANT STATES: That he was in good health when he enlisted. He has since been granted service connection for his schizophrenia by the VA and awarded a 100 percent disability for that condition by that department. In support of his application he submits a Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA) rating decision which grants him service connection for his schizophrenia and subsequent rating decisions awarding him a 100 percent disability rating. EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military personnel and medical records show: He enlisted in the USAR in pay grade E-1 on 12 April 1975. He entered active duty on 26 August 1975 for his initial active duty for training. On 3 November 1975 he was referred by mental health for psychiatric evaluation and admitted to the hospital. He had been at a bar, had gotten intoxicated and pulled out a knife. He was diagnosed as suffering from paranoid schizophrenia. On 14 November 1975 a medical evaluation board (MEB) convened and determined that the applicant was medically disqualified due to schizophrenia, a condition which was not incurred nor aggravated by military service. The applicant then waived consideration by a physical evaluation board (PEB) and consented to a discharge under the Expeditious Discharge Program (EDP). Accordingly, on 26 January 1976 the applicant was honorably discharged for physical disability, existing prior to service. Army Regulation 635-40 provides guidance and policies for physical evaluation for retention, retirement and separation. Chapter 5 provides for separation of personnel due to conditions that existed prior to enlistment, were not aggravated by the period of service and for which the individual waived evaluation by a PEB. Title 10, United States Code, chapter 61, provides disability retirement for a member who has more than 20 years of service or a disability rated at 30 percent or greater. In a previous advisory opinion obtained from The Judge Advocate General (TJAG) it was stated that a rating from the VA has little to no weight in determining eligibility for disability retirement by the Army in the eyes of the court (Kirwin v. United States, 23 Cl.Ct497(1991). The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Forth Edition, states that while the etiology of schizophrenia is currently unknown, the likelihood of an individual to be schizophrenic is 10 times greater if the person has a parent who is schizophrenic. In the processing of this case an advisory opinion (COPY ATTACHED) was obtained from the Army Review Boards Agency Medical Advisor. The Medical Advisor stated that he could find no evidence that would warrant changing the applicant’s discharge to a medical retirement. DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record and applicable law and regulations,it is concluded: 1. The applicant’s disability appears to be congenital (a person who is predisposed, or destined, to have the disease from birth) and, therefore, EPTS, with no evidence of service aggravation. In other words, the applicant would have become schizophrenic whether or not he ever enlisted in the Army. 2. The award of service connection and a disability rating by the VA is well within that department’s purview and in no way indicates that the finding of EPTS by the Army was in error. 3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request. DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. BOARD VOTE: GRANT GRANT FORMAL HEARING JEV LLS TNK DENY APPLICATION Edmund P. Mercanti Loren G. Harrell Director