DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2005-002 
 
XXXXX XXXXXXX 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
AUTHOR: Hale, 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  October  1,  2004,  upon  receipt  of  the  applicant’s 
completed application and military records. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  June  9,  2005,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The  applicant,  a  former  seaman  yeoman  (SNYN)  in  the  Coast  Guard, 
asked  the  Board  to  correct  her  military  record  by  upgrading  the  reenlistment 
code  on  her  discharge  form  (DD  214)  so  that  she  would  be  eligible  to  reenlist.  
She  was  discharged  on  January  3,  2000,  with  an  RE-4  reenlistment  code 
(ineligible for reenlistment), a JFX separation code (unsuitable for service due to 
a  personality  disorder),  and  “Personality  Disorder”  as  the  narrative  reason  for 
separation shown on her DD 214. 
 
The applicant stated that she wants to go back on active duty and is fully 
 
capable  of  performing  her  job.    She  alleged  that  her  work  history  since  her 
discharge from the Coast Guard proves that she is a dedicated and hard worker.  
In  support  of  this  allegation,  she  submitted  a  letter  from  her  employer  stating 
that she “has proven herself to be very dependable and reliable.  She has shown 

good  work  ethic  and  is  a  self-starter.    Heather  shows  integrity  in  her  dealings 
with others, and has a positive attitude towards all things.” 

 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 

On  September  15,  1997,  the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Coast  Guard  for  a 

 
term of four years.  After completing boot camp, she was assigned to a cutter.  

 
On  July  7,  1999,  the  applicant  received  non-judicial  punishment  (NJP) 
from her commanding officer (CO).  She was found to have created false travel 
orders  for  a  friend  and  the  applicant  was  subsequently  punished  with  a 
reduction  in  pay  grade.    On  the  page  7  administrative  entry1  documenting  the 
NJP, she was assigned marks of 2 (on a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 being best) in the 
“Responsibility” and “Integrity” performance categories.  
 

On September 23, 1999, and October 8, 1999, the applicant was evaluated 
at a naval mental health clinic for a variety of problems.  On November 9, 1999, 
the applicant was evaluated for a third time by a psychiatrist at the mental health 
clinic,  who  noted  a  history  of  depressed  mood,  occasional  suicidal  ideations, 
social withdrawal, decreased sleep, anhedonia,2 decreased energy, and decreased 
concentration.    Following  her  examination  of  the  applicant,  the  psychiatrist 
reported that: 

 
This service member has been clinically determined to be unsuitable for 
continued service based upon a DSM [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual 
of  Mental  Disorders]  IV  diagnosis  of  an  Adjustment  Disorder  with 
depressed mood and Axis II diagnosis of Cluster B traits are sufficiently 
severe as to preclude satisfactory performance of duty.  Her disorder is a 
consequence of her personality traits and concurrent inability to tolerate 
the  military  environment.    Given  the  member’s  personality  style  that 
makes her vulnerable to affective illness and poor judgment, she is likely 
to continue to experience emotional difficulties.  No amount of training or 
leadership will reverse this condition.  Her personality traits existed prior 
to  enlistment  and  are  likely  to  continue  even  beyond  discharge  from 
military  service. 
is  not  warranted  at  this  time.  
Administrative separation is strongly recommended. 

  Hospitalization 

 
 
On  November  17,  1999,  the  applicant’s  commanding  officer  formally 
notified  her  that  he  was  initiating  her  discharge  under  Article  12.B.12.a.  of  the 
                                                 
1 An Administrative Remarks, or Page 7, entry documents any counseling that is provided to a 
service member as well as any other noteworthy events that occur during that member’s military 
career. 
2  Anhedonia  is  a  “total  loss  of  feeling  of  pleasure  in  acts  that  normally  give  pleasure.”  
DORLAND’S ILLUSTRATED MEDICAL DICTIONARY, 29TH ED. (2000), p. 89. 

Coast  Guard  Personnel  Manual  because  she  had  been  diagnosed  as  having  an 
adjustment disorder.  The CO also notified her that she was entitled to submit a 
statement on her own behalf.  The applicant signed a statement acknowledging 
the notification, waiving her right to submit a statement, and indicating that she 
did not object to being discharged.   
 
 
On  November  22,  1999,  the  CO  recommended  to  the  Coast  Guard 
Personnel Command (CGPC) that the applicant be honorably discharged for the 
convenience  of  the  government,  based  on  her  diagnosed  adjustment  disorder 
with  depressed  mood.    The  CO  wrote  that  the  applicant  had  been  clinically 
determined to be unsuitable for continued service based upon her diagnosis.  
 
 
On December 7, 1999, CGPC ordered the CO to discharge the applicant, in 
accordance with Article 12.B.16., no later than January 3, 2000, with an honorable 
discharge by reason of unsuitability, and with the “appropriate narrative reason 
for discharge found in the separation program designator [SPD] handbook.”  The 
applicant  was  discharged  on  January  3,  2000,  with  the  JFX  separation  code,  an 
RE-4  reenlistment  code,  and  “Personality  Disorder”  as  the  narrative  reason  for 
separation. 
 
 
Prior  to  filing  her  application  with  the  Board,  the  applicant  submitted  a 
request to the Coast Guard’s Discharge Review Board (DRB) for the same relief 
requested  from  the  BCMR.    On  April  6,  2004,  the  DRB  denied  the  applicant's 
request, stating that her discharge had been carried out in accordance with Coast 
Guard policy.  On July 15, 2004, the Commandant reviewed the DRB’s decision 
and approved its finding that the applicant’s discharge was proper. 
 

 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 
On  February  14,  2005,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (JAG)  of  the  Coast 
Guard submitted an advisory opinion recommending that the Board grant relief 
by  correcting  the  applicant’s  DD  214  to  show  a  different  separation  authority, 
separation code, reentry code, and narrative reason for separation.   
 
 
The  JAG  relied  on  a  memorandum  from  the  Coast  Guard  Personnel 
Command (CGPC) concerning the applicant’s request.  CGPC recommended that 
partial  relief  be  granted,  and  stated  that  the  applicant’s  discharge  did  not 
conform  to  the  diagnosis  provided  by  the  psychiatrist  who  evaluated  her  and 
recommended  her  discharge.    CGPC  noted  that  the  applicant  was  diagnosed 
with an adjustment disorder, but her DD 214 states that the reason for separation 
was  a  personality  disorder.    CGPC  further  stated,  “absent  any  record  of  any 
psychological  diagnosis  stating  such,  I  must  assume  that  the  decision  to 
discharge the applicant due to personality disorder was in error.”  CGPC alleged 

that the applicant is harmed by the continued assignment of the JFX separation 
code  and  the  RE-4  reenlistment  code  because  they  prevent  the  applicant  from 
reenlisting.  
 

CGPC  recommended  that  four  changes  be  made  to  the  applicant’s  DD 
214. It recommended that the separation authority be changed to Article 12.B.12. 
of the Personnel Manual, that the separation code be changed to JFV,3 that the 
reenlistment  code  be  changed  to  RE-3G,4  and  that  the  narrative  reason  for 
separation be changed to “Condition, Not a Disability.” 

                                                 
3  JFV  is  used  to  denote  an  involuntary  separation  when  a  condition,  not  a  physical  disability, 
interferes with the performance of duty.  SPD Code Handbook, page 2-5. 
4 An RE-3G means that the veteran is eligible for reenlistment if she can prove that she no longer 
has the condition for which she was originally discharged.   
 

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On February 24, 2005, the BCMR sent the applicant a copy of the views of 
 
the Coast Guard and invited her to respond within 30 days.  She responded on 
March  17,  2005,  stating  that  she  did  not  object  to  the  Coast  Guard’s 
recommendation.   
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 

Article 12.B.12.a. of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual provides that the 
Commander  may  authorize  or  direct  the  separation  of  enlisted  members  for  a 
number of reasons, including unsuitability. 

 
Chapter  5.B.2.  of  the  Coast  Guard  Medical  Manual  lists  the  personality 
disorders for which a member may be separated.  Adjustment disorders are not 
included  and  are  addressed  in  Chapter  5.B.3  of  the  Manual,  which  states  that 
adjustment  disorders  “are  generally  treatable  and  not  usually  grounds  for 
separation,”  but 
that  members  with  adjustment  disorders  may  be 
administratively discharged “when these conditions persist or treatment is likely 
to be prolonged or non-curative (e.g. inability to adjust to military life …).”   
 

Chapter 3.F.16.d. of the Medical Manual states that adjustment disorders 
“do not render an individual unfit because of physical impairment.  However, if 
these conditions are recurrent and interfere with military duty, are not amenable 
to  treatment,  or  require  prolonged  treatment,  administrative  separation  should 
be recommended (see Section 5-B).”  
 
 
Article 1.E. of the Coast Guard Instruction for completing discharge forms 
states that a member’s DD 214 should show a separation code and reenlistment 
code  “as  shown  in  the  SPD  Handbook  or  as  stated  by  [CGPC]  in  the  message 
granting  discharge  authority.”    The  narrative  reason  for  separation  on  the  DD 
214 must be whatever is specified by CGPC. 
 
 
narrative reasons for separation, which might apply to the applicant’s case: 
 

The  SPD  Handbook  includes  the  following  combinations  of  codes  and 

SPD 
Code 
JFX 

Narrative Reason 
for Separation 
Personality 
Disorder 

JFV 

Condition, Not a 
Disability 

RE-4 or 
RE-3G 

12.B.12 

 

RE Code 
RE-4 or 
RE-3G 

Separation 
Authority 
12.B.16 

 
Explanation 
Involuntarily discharge [by direction] when a 
personality disorder exists, not amounting to a 
disability, which potentially interferes with 
assignment to or performance of duty. 
Involuntarily discharge [by direction] when a 
condition, not a physical disability, interferes 
with the performance of duty (Enuresis, motion 

sickness, allergy, obesity, fear of flying, et al.) 

 
Under Article 12.B.4. of the Personnel Manual, a member’s commanding 
 
officer  has  authority  to  decide  which  of  the  permissible  RE  codes  listed  in  the 
SPD Handbook is assigned to the member. 
 

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 in this case pursuant to section 1552 of 
title 10 of the United States Code.  The application was timely.  An applicant has 
fifteen years from the date of discharge to apply to the DRB for an upgrade of her 
discharge.  The applicant applied to the DRB approximately four years after her 
discharge, and the DRB issued a final decision on April 6, 2004.  Pursuant to 33 
CFR § 52.13, the applicant was required to exhaust her administrative remedies 
by applying to the DRB.  According to Ortiz v. Secretary of Defense, 41 F3rd. 738 
(D.C. Cir. 1994), the BCMR’s three year statute of limitations begins to run at the 
conclusion  of  DRB  proceedings  for  an  applicant  who  is  required  to  exhaust 
administrative remedies by applying to the DRB before seeking redress from the 
BCMR.  Therefore, the applicant’s BCMR application, received by the Board on 
September 22, 2004, was timely. 

2. 

The Board notes that the applicant is not contesting her discharge 
from the Coast Guard; she is only seeking a change in her reenlistment code so 
she may be allowed to reenlist.  The applicant’s DD 214 indicates that she was 
discharged  because  of  a  personality  disorder  and  given  an  RE-4  reenlistment 
code.    However,  the  record  indicates  and  the  Coast  Guard  admits  that  the 
applicant was never diagnosed with a personality disorder.  As the Coast Guard 
stated,  “Condition,  Not  a  Disability”  would  be  more  appropriate  in  this  case 
because  the  applicant  was  discharged  due  to  an  adjustment  disorder,  not  a 
personality  disorder.    The  separation  code  for  “Condition,  Not  a  Disability”  is 
JFV, not JFX.   

 
3. 

The SPD Handbook permits an RE-3G reenlistment code as well as 
an RE-4 for a discharge resulting from an adjustment disorder characterized as a 
“Condition, Not a Disability.”  The RE-4 code is a permanent bar to reenlistment, 
but an RE-3G would require the applicant to satisfy a recruiting command that 
she no longer suffers from her adjustment disorder before she would be allowed 
to reenlist.  Adjustment disorders are not permanent according to the DSM, and 
the  evidence  submitted  by  the  applicant  indicates  that  she  has  been  able  to 

maintain steady employment.  Therefore, the Board agrees with the Coast Guard 
that the applicant’s RE code should be upgraded to RE-3G. 

   
4. 

The JAG and CGPC recommended that the applicant’s DD 214 be 
corrected  to  cure  these  inaccuracies.    The  Board  agrees.    Given  the  applicant’s 
diagnosed  adjustment  disorder  and  the  provisions  of  the  SPD  Handbook,  the 
Coast  Guard  should  have  assigned  her  the  JFV  separation  code  for  having  a 
condition  that  precludes  military  service  but  does  not  amount  to  a  physical 
disability.    The  applicant  was  diagnosed  with  an  adjustment  disorder  and  her 
CO recommended her discharge pursuant to Article 12.B.12.a. of the Personnel 
manual,  but  her  DD  214  indicates  that  she  was  discharged  because  she  had  a 
“Personality  Disorder.”    This  error,  in  turn,  caused  her  DD  214  to  reflect  an 
incorrect separation authority, and narrative reason for separation.  The article of 
the  Personnel  Manual  that  authorizes  the  separation  of  a  member  with  a 
condition that is not a disability, is Article 12.B.12, rather than 12.B.16.  
 

5. 

In  light  the  applicant’s  diagnosis  and  the  JAG’s  recommendation, 
the Board finds that it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s 
separation code to JFV, correct her narrative reason for separation to “Condition, 
Not a Disability,” and correct the separation authority shown on her DD 214 to 
Article  12.B.12.  of  the  Personnel  Manual.    In  addition,  her  reenlistment  code 
should be corrected to RE-3G.   
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

 

ORDER 

 

The  application  of  former  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,  USCG,  for 

correction of her military record is granted as follows: 

 
Block  25  shall  be  corrected  to  show  Article  12.B.12.  of  the  Personnel 
Manual as the separation authority. 

 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Block 26 shall be corrected to show JFV as the separation code. 

Block 27 shall be corrected to show RE-3G as the reenlistment code. 

Block  28  shall  be  corrected  to  show  “Condition,  Not  a  Disability”  as  the 
narrative reason for separation. 
 
The Coast Guard shall issue the applicant a new DD 214 reflecting these 
corrected entries. 
 
 
   

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

_______________________________ 
James E. McLeod 

_______________________________ 
J. Carter Robertson 

 

_______________________________ 
Darren S. Wall