DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2004-099 
 
  
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
Author:  Ulmer, D. 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title  10  and  section  425  of  title  14  of  the  United  States  Code.    The  application  was 
docketed on April 23, 2004, upon receipt of the applicant’s completed application and 
military records. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated January 27, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST 

 The  applicant  asked  the  Board  to  correct  her  military  record  by  changing  the 

 
 
reason for her honorable discharge from unacceptable conduct to physical disability. 
 

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The  applicant  alleged  that  she  should  have  been  discharged  by  reason  of 
physical disability because she suffered from depression, a sleep disorder, and a broken 
collarbone that caused her discharge from the Coast Guard.  She stated that she wants 
her DD Form 214 to accurately reflect the reason for her discharge.   
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Delayed Entry program on February 
 
23, 2002.  She was discharged from this program and entered active duty on September 
10, 2002.   

 
 
On  February  19,  2003,  the  applicant  was  taken  to  an  emergency  room  because 
she  had  "intentionally  lacerated  her  right  wrist  with  a  belt  buckle  and  razor."    The 
medical report of this visit indicated that the applicant was unhappy being in the Coast 
Guard  and  wanted  to  return  home.    The  applicant  was  discharged  from  the  hospital 
with a diagnosis of "impulsive suicidal gesture,"  "situational anxiety and depression," 
and "superficial abrasion, right wrist."  She was referred to a community mental health 
facility for follow-up care. 
 
 
On  February  25,  2003,  a  Navy  psychiatrist  recommended  that  the  applicant  be 
administratively  discharged  from  the  Coast Guard  due  to  a  personality  disorder.    He 
diagnosed the applicant as suffering from a personality disorder NOS, with borderline 
and  histrionic  features.    He  stated that  the  applicant's  condition  was  not  amenable  to 
treatment routinely available in a military setting.  He further stated, "Continued service 
places both this service member and her colleagues at risk.  This sailor should not be 
granted access to weapons, sensitive materials, or government vehicles.  Follow-up care 
should continue through date of discharge." 
 
 
The  record  also  contains  an  "Intake  Note"  from  a  psychologist  dated  March  4, 
2003.    The  note  indicated  that  the  applicant  reported  feeling  lonely,  bored,  and 
withdrawn,  but  denied  that  she  had  any  plans  to  harm  herself.    The  psychologist 
diagnosed the applicant as suffering from an adjustment disorder with acute depressed 
mood and difficulty adjusting to military life.  He recommended that the applicant be 
treated with individual therapy.   
 
 
On October 22, 2003, a clinician wrote that the applicant had been a patient at a 
family  center  since  April  2003.    This  individual  stated  that  the  applicant  received 
treatment  for  insomnia  and  depression,  which  was  currently  in  remission  on 
medication.  He further stated that "[the applicant] has had problems with poor sleep in 
the  station  environment,  and  I  would  request  that  she  be  allowed  to  maintain  a 
residence off base."   
 
 
On December 22, 2003, the officer in charge (OIC) advised the applicant that he 
was  recommending  that  the  applicant  be  discharged  with  a  General  Discharge  by 
reason  of  personality  disorder  NOS,  with  borderline  and  histrionic  features.    The 
applicant acknowledged that she could object to the discharge, request to speak with a 
lawyer, and submit a statement in her own behalf.   
 
 
On  December  22,  2003,  the  applicant  submitted  a  statement  objecting  to  her 
proposed discharge.   She asked to be retained in the Coast Guard.   She acknowledged 
that  she  had  difficulties  with  depression  and  had  attempted  suicide.    However,  the 
applicant asserted that her condition had improved and that she had been told that she 

did  not  need  further  counseling  or  medication.    She  stated  that  her  performance  had 
improved and that she had become boat crew qualified.   
 
On  December  26,  2003,  the  OIC  recommended  that  the  Commander,  Coast 
 
Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) discharge the applicant with a General Discharge 
due to a personality disorder based on the diagnosis of the Navy psychiatrist.  The OIC 
also  noted  the  applicant's  numerous  administrative  remarks  (page  7s)  negative 
counseling entries, numerous reports of offenses, and two dishonored checks written to 
the Coast Guard.  He elaborated as follows: 
 

in  her  ability 

Due  to  [the  applicant's]  continued  unstable  mental  state,  I  have  lost 
confidence 
to  perform  her  required  duties  and 
responsibilities and am concerned for her well-being if not released.  On 
26Sep03  [the  applicant]  was  placed  on  performance  probation  and  has 
shown no improvement in her maturity, integrity or loyalty to this service.  
[The applicant] still continues to show up to work late and or too tired to 
perform  her  duties.      Since  [the  applicant]  reported  she  has  had  her 
qualifications  pulled,  been  placed  on  report  six  times,  and  has  twelve 
negative  [page  7s]  and  two  dishonored  checks  reported  back  from  the 
finance  center.   One  of these Reports of Offense coming only four days 
after being told that this Command was recommending her for discharge 
from the Service.  Member has been sent to local medical facilities to see if 
there  was  some  underlining  medical  condition  that  was  contributing  to 
her tardiness [.]  Negative conditions [were] found. 

 
 
On February 4, 2004, Commander, Coast Guard Personnel Command approved 
the  applicant's  honorable  separation  from  the  service  due  to  unsuitability.    He  stated 
that  the  applicant  should  be  discharged  with  an  honorable  discharge  "by  reason  of 
unsuitability  due  to  apathy,  defective  attitudes,  adjustment  disorder  and  inability  to 
expend  effort  constructively  under  Article  12.B.16  of  [the  Personnel  Manual]."    He 
stated that the applicant should receive a JNC (unacceptable conduct) separation code 
and be discharged no later than March 4, 2004.   
 

On February 4, 2004, the applicant reported to the emergency room after falling 

and  landing  on  her right  shoulder.    She  complained  of  pain  around  her  mid  clavicle.     
X-rays  showed  a  fracture  of  the  mid  clavicle  with  minimal  displacement.    She  was 
placed in a sling and told not to return to work until cleared by the orthopedic surgeon.  
 
 
On February 10, 2004, the applicant underwent a medical examination and was 
found  fit  for  service.    The  physician  noted  on  the  physical  examination  form  that  the 
applicant had suffered a clavicle fracture and that her depression was controlled or in 
remission.  He also seemed to note that the applicant was undergoing an administrative 
separation due to a personality disorder.   

On March 3, 2004, an x-ray revealed the clavicle fracture was healing nicely.    

On March 4, 2004, the applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard by reason 

 
 
 
 
of unacceptable conduct with the corresponding JNC separation code.   
 
Page 7 Administrative Entries and Other Documentation 
 
 
Between  April  15,  2003,  and  December  22,  2003,  twelve  negative  counseling 
entries (page 7s) were entered into the applicant's record.  The applicant was counseled 
for  tardiness  repeatedly,  for  falling  asleep  during  training  and  on  duty,  for  visiting 
unauthorized  websites,  for  involving  a  government  vehicle  in  a  collision,  and  for 
unsatisfactory  marks  in  conduct  that  resulted  in  the  termination  of  her  good  conduct 
eligibility period. 
 
 
In July and October 2003, the applicant wrote two checks to the Coast Guard in 
the amounts of $81.10 and $964.45 that were dishonored when presented for payment.  
(There is no documentation in the record showing that the applicant made restitution 
for the dishonored checks).  
 
 
The  military  record  indicates  that  the  applicant  was  taken  to  captain's  mast 
(punishment  under  Article  15  of  the  Uniform  Code  of  Military  Justice  (UCMJ))  on 
October 24, 2003, and was punished with 8 days of extra duties.  (The offense for which 
the applicant was punished is not discernable from the record.) 
 
 
On December 22, 2003, the applicant was punished at captain's mast for failure to 
obey a lawful order or regulation by not reporting to work on time as directed.  She was 
restricted to the station for 8 days and given extra duties for 8 days.   
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  October  18,  2004,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (TJAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard 
submitted  an  advisory  opinion.    A  memorandum  from  CGPC  was  attached  to  the 
advisory opinion as Enclosure (1).  TJAG asked the Board to accept the memorandum as 
part of the advisory opinion.  
 

CGPC  recommended  that  the  Board  deny  the  applicant's  request  to  have  her 

record reflect a medical discharge. In this regard he stated the following: 
 

The  applicant's  specific  request  to  change  the  narrative  reason  of  her 
separation  from  "Unacceptable  Conduct"  to  "Medical"  should  not  be 
granted.  Per current and longstanding Coast Guard policy the Applicant's 
diagnosed Personality Disorder is not considered a medical condition for 

separation  purposes,  but  may  be  the  basis  for  an  administrative 
separation.    There  was  no  basis  to  medically  separate  the  Applicant  or 
introduce her into the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES).  As 
per the Applicant's injury sustained on February 4, 2004, . . . Coast Guard 
policy  states  that  service  members  being  processed  for  separation  or 
retirement for reasons other than physical disability shall not be referred 
for  disability  evaluation  unless  their  physical  condition  reasonably 
prompts  doubt  that  they  are  unfit  to  continue  to  perform  adequately  in 
their  assigned  duties.    The  applicant  was  treated  for  her  injuries  and 
completed  an  additional  separation  physical  to  confirm  her  physical 
qualification for separation.   

 
 
However, CGPC noted that the applicant's DD Form 214 did not correctly reflect 
the  reason  for  her  discharge.    He  stated  that  it  was  evident  that  the  applicant  was 
diagnosed  with  and  processed  for  discharge  due  to  a  personality  disorder.      He 
therefore recommended that the applicant's DD Form 214 be corrected as follows:  
 
Block 25.  Change separation code to JFX 
Block 26.  Change reentry code to RE-3G 
Block 28.  Change narrative reason for separation to personality disorder. 
 
 

 

 
 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On December 6, 2004, the BCMR received the applicant's response to the views of 

 
 
the Coast Guard.  She stated that she agreed with the advisory opinion. 
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 
Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6A) 
 
 
Article  12.B.16  of  the  Personnel  Manual  lists  "Personality  Disorders"  and  
"Apathy,  Defective  Attitudes,  and  Inability  to  Expend  Effort  Constructively"  as  bases 
for an unsuitability discharge.   

Medical Manual (COMDTINST M6000.1B)  
  
Chapter  5.B.2.  lists  the  following  as  personality  disorders:    Paranoid,  Schizoid, 
 
Schizotypal,  Obsessive  Compulsive,  Histrionic,  Dependent,  Antisocial,  Narcissistic, 
Avoidant, Borderline, and Personality disorder NOS (includes Passive-aggressive).   

 

Chapter  5.B.3.  states  that  adjustment  disorders  may  be  grounds  for  separation 
when  such  conditions  are  persistent  or  treatment  is  likely  to  be  prolonged  or  non-
curative  (e.g., 
life/sea  duty,  separation  from 
family/friends) . . ." 

to  military 

inability 

to  adjust 

 

Physical Disability Evaluation System Manual 
 
 
Chapter  2.A.  7.  lists  personality  disorders  among  those  conditions  and  defects 
that  may  cause  a  member  to  be  unfit  for  continued  duty  and  yet  not  be  physically 
disabled  within  the  meaning  of  the  law,  thereby  resulting  in  the  member's 
administrative separation. 
 

Chapter 2.C.2.e. of the PDES Manual states that "[a member] convalescing from a 
disease or injury which reasonably may be expected to improve so that he or she will be 
able to perform the duties of his . . . rank or rating in the near future may be found fit 
for duty." 
 
Separation Program Designator (SPD) Handbook 
 
 
The SPD Handbook defines a discharge by reason of unacceptable conduct with 
a  JNC  separation  code  as  an  "Involuntary  discharge  directed  by  established  directive 
(no  board  entitlement)  when  [a]  member  performs  acts  of  unacceptable  conduct  (i.e., 
moral and/or professional dereliction) not otherwise listed." 
 
 
The  SPD  Handbook  authorizes  the  assignment  of  an  RE-3G  or  an  RE-4 
reenlistment  code  with  a  personality  disorder  discharge.    It  defines  a  personality 
disorder discharge with a JFX separation code as an "Involuntary discharge directed by 
established directive when a personality disorder exists, not amounting to a disability, 
which potentially interferes with the assignment to or performance of duty." 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the 
 
applicant's  military  record  and  submissions,  the  Coast  Guard's  submissions,  and 
applicable law: 
 

1.  The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to section 1552 of 

title 10 of the United States Code.  The application was timely. 
 

2.    The  applicant  has  not  proved  by  a  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  she 
suffered from a physical disability that caused her to be unfit for continued duty, and 
therefore,  she  is  not  entitled  to  a  disability  separation.  The  applicant  was  diagnosed 

with personality and adjustment disorders while on active duty.   However, according 
to Chapter 2.A.7. of the PDES Manual, such disorders are not physical disabilities and 
service members who suffer from such conditions are not processed under the physical 
disability evaluation system, but may be administratively separated under Chapter 12 
of the Personnel Manual.  

 
3.  Moreover, there is no indication in the record that the applicant suffered from 
any other conditions that would have entitled her to a discharge by reason of physical 
disability.  Article  2.C.2.b.  of  the  PDES  Manual  states,  "The  law  that  provides  for 
disability . . . separation . . . is designed to compensate a member whose military service 
is  terminated  due  to  a  physical  disability  that  has  rendered  him  or  her  unfit  for 
continued duty."  Article 2.C.2.a. states that the sole standard in making determinations 
of physical disability as a basis for retirement or separation shall be unfitness to perform 
the duties of one's rank or rating. 
 

4.  Although the applicant suffered a right clavicle fracture, there is no evidence 
in the record that the fracture caused the applicant to be unfit for continued duty.   In 
this regard, the applicant underwent a physical examination on February 10, 2004, and 
was found fit for duty, although her right clavicle fracture had not completely healed.  
The medical evidence indicated that the fracture was healing nicely.  Article 2.C.2.e. of 
the PDES Manual states that "[a member] convalescing from a disease or injury which 
reasonably may be expected to improve so  that he or she will be  able to perform the 
duties of his . . . rank or rating in the near future may be found fit for duty."  There is no 
evidence that the applicant suffered any permanent disability as a result of this fracture 
that would cause her to be unable to perform the duties of her rank and rating.   

  
5.  The  Board  finds,  in  contrast  to  the  advisory  opinion,  that  the  applicant's 
discharge by reason of unacceptable conduct was not in error or unjust.  The numerous 
negative  page  7s, two  dishonored  checks,  and  NJPs  support  an  unacceptable  conduct 
discharge.    However,  we  also  find  that  medical  documentation  in  the  applicant's 
military record supported a discharge by reason of personality disorder, as requested 
by  her  OIC.    In  light of  this  finding,  TJAG's  recommendation  that  the  applicant's  DD 
Form  214  be  corrected  to  show  that  she  was  discharged  by  reason  of  personality 
disorder rather than unacceptable conduct, and the applicant's acceptance of this relief, 
the  Board  will  direct  that  the  reason  for  the  applicant's  discharge  be  changed  to 
personality disorder, with a JFX separation code, and an RE-3G reenlistment code.  

  
6.  Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to the relief discussed above.  

 
 

 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

 
 

ORDER 

 

The  application  of  ___________________  USCG,  for  correction  of  her  military 

record is hereby granted in part.  Her DD Form 214 shall be corrected as follows: 
 
 

 

Block 26 shall be corrected to JFX (personality disorder) as the separation 
code. 
 
Block 27 shall be corrected to show RE-3G as the reenlistment code. 
 
Block 28 shall be corrected to show personality disorder as the reason for 
separation. 

 
 

 
The Coast Guard shall issue the applicant a new DD Form 214. 
 

All other requested relief is denied. 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

        

 
 Stephen H. Barber 

 

 

 
 
 Adrian Sevier 

 

 

 

 
 Thomas H. Van Horn