DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2007-221 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   

 

 
 

 

FINAL DECISION 

 
 
This proceeding was conducted under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and sec-
tion 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  The Chair docketed the case on September 26, 
2007, upon receipt of the completed application, and assigned it to staff member J. Andrews to 
prepare the decision for the Board as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  June  12,  2008,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant, who was discharged from the Coast Guard on September 14, 2001, asked 
the Board to correct his record by upgrading his reenlistment code from RE-3G (ineligible to 
reenlist without a waiver) to RE-1 (eligible to reenlist).  He alleged that the claustrophobia that 
caused him to be discharged was a “freak, one-time occurrence” that has not happened again.  
The  applicant  alleged  that  he  currently  works  in  an  office,  rides  the  train  to  work,  and  takes 
elevators everyday without a problem.  The applicant stated that he currently serves as a Coast 
Guard auxiliarist1 but wants to serve on active duty again. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

On January 23, 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard at age 20.  Upon complet-
ing basic training and telecommunications specialist “A” School, he was assigned to a cutter and 
reported for duty on July 29, 2001.  The next day, July 30, 2001, a chief health services special-
ist, HSC, noted in the applicant’s medical record that the applicant was anxious and said that he 
could not stay on the cutter because he felt “closed in.  It freaks me out.”  The applicant had slept 

                                                 
1  The  Coast  Guard  Auxiliary  was  established  in  by  Congress  in  1939  as  a  group  of  volunteer  civilians  who  are 
authorized to wear a uniform similar to the Coast Guard officer's uniform.  The Auxiliary’s missions include public 
education in boat handling, navigation, and marine safety and assisting active duty and reserve members in rescue 
missions, environmental protection, and patrolling regattas and other marine events.  

in his car the night before to avoid sleeping on the cutter.  The command referred the applicant to 
a  Naval  Hospital  for  psychiatric  evaluation.    On August  1,  2001,  the  applicant  provided  the 
following history of his symptoms, as reported by a psychiatric technician: 

 
[The applicant] first experienc[ed] his symptoms at boot camp during a fire-fighting exercise in 
which  he  had  to  be  in  full  gear  and  the  oxygen  breathing  apparatus  (OBA)  for  30  minutes.  
Although he was able to get through the entire exercise, the whole time he felt that he was ready to 
“snap” and probably could have only last another five minutes.  Shortly after boot camp while he 
was on leave he  started to have anxiety and feelings of  tension  when in elevators and  crowded 
areas.  [He] stated that he went to his “A” School after leave and didn’t notice this problem occur-
ring,  however  stated  that  he  avoided  most  crowded  and  cramped  areas  during  this  time.    [He] 
stated that he took leave between his “A” School and reporting to the [cutter] and he noticed the 
anxiety again when he was in crowded areas and on elevators “with a lot of people or if I had to be 
away from the door.”  The SN reported that he arrived to his new duty station on the 29th of July 
and that when they were giving him a tour of the boat, he started becoming more and more nerv-
ous.    [He]  reported  that  after  two  hours  of  being  on  board  he  had  to  leave  because  he  was 
experiencing an anxiety attack.  [He] stated that he returned to the ship later to see if he could han-
dle being on board again.  [He] almost immediately started having the same feeling and just left 
the boat.  [He] called his chief from off the boat and told him what happened and then proceeded 
to sleep in his car that night. 
 
Also on August 1, 2001, a staff psychiatrist at the Naval Hospital reported that the 

applicant 

 
presented with a 3-4 month complaint of anxiety and panic symptoms within enclosed spaces and 
situations in which escape might be difficult.  This was noted to be profound once aboard ship, 
particularly in the berthing  spaces.  His  medical record reveals documented elevations  in blood 
pressure and pulse during an anxiety attack aboard ship.  The patient does not experience symp-
toms outside of this specific circumstance.  His symptoms have resulted in occupation limitations 
and poor motivation for continued service.  He endorses some neurovegetative symptoms over the 
last three days since reporting to Seattle in response to the profound anxiety that he has experi-
enced.  He denies any other symptoms suggestive of depressive, anxiety, or psychotic disorders. 
 
The psychiatrist diagnosed the applicant with “Specific Phobia, situational type (claustro-
phobia – fear of enclosed spaces).”2  He concluded that the applicant was fit for duty but had a 
“condition which is not amenable to continued service” and should not be assigned to work on a 
ship or in enclosed spaces.  The psychiatrist recommended that the applicant be administratively 
discharged  because  of  his  “mental  condition,”  which  was  not  a  disability  but  rendered  him 
“incapable of serving adequately in the U.S. Coast Guard.” 

 
On September 14, 2001, the applicant was honorably discharged with an RE-4 reenlist-
ment code (ineligible); a JFX separation code (involuntary discharge due to diagnosed “personal-

                                                 
2 A “specific phobia” is a “marked and persistent fear of clearly discernible, circumscribed objects or situations.”  
American  Psychiatric  Association,  DIAGNOSTIC  AND  STATISTICAL  MANUAL  OF  MENTAL  DISORDERS,  FOURTH 
EDITION, TEXT REVISION (2000) (DSM-IV-TR), p. 443.  “Specific phobia” is listed in the DSM-IV-TR as a type of 
anxiety disorder and is not listed with the personality disorders.  The subtypes of specific phobias include animal, 
natural environment (such as storms, heights, or water), blood-injection-injury, situational, and other.  Id. at 445.  
The situational type of specific phobia is fear “cued by a specific situation, such as public transportation, tunnels, 
bridges, elevators, flying, driving, or enclosed spaces.”  Id. The Coast Guard relies on the DSM when diagnosing 
members with psychiatric conditions.  See Coast Guard Medical Manual (COMDTINST M6000.1B), Chap. 5.B.1. 

ity disorder”3); and “unsuitability” as his narrative reason for separation on his discharge form 
DD 214.   

 
On  January  30,  2002,  the  applicant  submitted  an  application  to  the  Discharge  Review 
Board (DRB),  asking for the RE-4 code, the JFX separation code,  and the narrative reason—
“unsuitability”—to be removed from his DD 214.  He asked that his narrative reason for separa-
tion  be  changed  to  “honorable.”    On  March  27,  2003,  after  reviewing  the  record,  the  DRB 
concluded that the applicant was not suitable for service in the Coast Guard but might be able to 
serve in another Service under circumstances where claustrophobia is not an issue.  Therefore, 
the DRB recommended that his reenlistment code be upgraded to RE-3G.  The DRB also voted 
to change his narrative reason to “Personality Disorder vice Unsuitability per the Separation Pro-
gram  Designator  Handbook.”    On  September  5,  2003,  the  Commandant  approved  the  recom-
mendations of the DRB, and the corrections were made to the DD 214 by issuance of a DD 215.  
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 
On February 19, 2008, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted 
an  advisory  opinion  recommending  that  the  Board  grant  partial  relief  by  correcting  the  appli-
cant’s narrative reason for discharge from “Personality Disorder” back to “Unsuitability.”  The 
JAG stated that the change made by the DRB in 2003 is inconsistent with Coast Guard policy 
because under COMDTINST M1900.4D, the manual for preparing DD 214s, the narrative rea-
son on a DD 214 is supposed to be general, such as “Unsuitability” or “Misconduct,” and should 
not provide additional information.  The JAG noted that the phrase “Personality Disorder” may 
be perceived as derogatory and so recommended that the Board order the Coast Guard to issue 
the applicant a new DD 214 with “Unsuitability” as the narrative reason for separation.  The JAG 
did not recommend upgrading the applicant’s reenlistment code to RE-1. 
 
 
The JAG submitted as part of the advisory opinion a memorandum on the case prepared 
by CGPC.  CGPC stated that members discharged for unsuitability may not receive RE-1 codes 
and that the RE-3G code is the most favorable reenlistment code authorized for members dis-
charged because of personality disorders. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On  February  20,  2008,  the  Chair  sent  the  applicant  the  views  of  the  Coast  Guard  and 

 
 
invited him to respond in writing within thirty days.  No response was received.   
 
                                                 
3 A “personality disorder” is “an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from the 
expectations of the individual’s culture, is pervasive and inflexible, has an onset in adolescence or early adulthood, 
is  stable  over  time,  and  leads  to  distress  or  impairment.”    DSM-IV-TR,  p.  685.    Types  of  personality  disorders 
include  paranoid,  schizoid,  schizotypal,  antisocial,  borderline,  histrionic,  narcissistic,  avoidant,  dependent,  and 
obsessive-compulsive.  Id.  “Specific phobia” is not listed as a type of personality disorder and is instead listed as a 
type  of  anxiety  disorder  in  the  DSM-IV-TR.    Id.  at  443.    “The  diagnosis  of  Personality  Disorders  requires  an 
evaluation of the individual’s long-term patterns of functioning … .  The personality traits that define these disorders 
must  also  be  distinguished  from  characteristics  that  emerge  in  response  to  specific  situational  stressors  or  more 
transient  mental  states  …  .    The  clinician  should  assess  the  stability  of  personality  traits  over  time  and  across 
different situations.”  Id. at 686.  

APPLICABLE LAW 

 

Chapter 5.B.11.a.5. of the Medical Manual indicates that “specific phobia” is a type of 
“panic disorder,” which is a subgroup of “anxiety disorders,” and may be grounds for adminis-
trative separation under Article 12.B. of the Personnel Manual.  No part of Article 12.B., how-
ever, expressly mentions phobias. 
 

Article 12.B.12. of the Personnel Manual authorizes enlisted personnel who have a condi-
tion that is not a disability but that interferes with the performance of duty to be discharged for 
the convenience of the Government.  Reasons for discharge listed under Article 12.B.12. include 
conditions such as obesity, motion sickness, enuresis (bedwetting), and somnambulism (sleep-
walking).   

 
Article 12.B.16. of the  Personnel Manual  authorizes enlisted personnel  with diagnosed 
personality disorders that are listed in Chapter 5 of the Medical Manual to be discharged by rea-
son of unsuitability at the direction of the Commandant.  Chapter 5.B.2 of the Medical Manual 
lists personality disorders that qualify a member for administrative discharge pursuant to Article 
12.B.16.  of  the  Personnel  Manual.    No  anxiety  disorder,  panic  disorder,  or  specific  phobia  is 
included among the personality disorders listed in Chapter 5.B.2.   
 
 
following: 
 

Article 1.E. of COMDTINST M1900.4D, the manual for completing DD 214s, states the 

Block  26.  Separation  Code. Enter  the  appropriate  separation  code  (SPD)  associated  with  a  par-
ticular  authority  and  reason  for  separation  as  shown  in  the  SPD  Handbook  or  as  stated  by  the 
MPC-SEP in the message granting discharge authority.  
 
Block 27. Reenlistment Code.  
1. Enlisted Personnel. Enter the appropriate reenlistment code to denote whether or not the mem-
ber  is  recommended  for  reenlistment.  Use  only  the  proper  reenlistment  code  associated  with  a 
particular SPD Code as shown in the SPD Handbook….  
 
Block  28.  Narrative  Reason  for  Separation.  Only  the  narrative  reason,  i.e.  UNSUITABILITY, 
MISCONDUCT, etc. is to be entered--do not enter additional information, i.e. "Due to frequent 
involvement with civil authorities, financial irresponsibility, etc."  

The SPD Handbook includes the following combinations of codes which might apply to 

 

the applicant’s case: 
 

SPD 
Code 
JFX 

Narrative Reason 
for Separation 
Personality 
Disorder 

JFV  Condition, Not a 

Disability 

RE 
Code 
RE-4 or 
RE-3G 

RE-4 or 
RE-3G 

Separation 
Authority 
12.B.16. 

12.B.12. 

 
Explanation 
Involuntarily discharged [by direction] when a personality 
disorder exists, not amounting to a disability, which poten-
tially interferes with assignment to or performance of duty. 
Involuntarily discharged [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.) 

 

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: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.   

An application to the Board must be filed within three  years after the applicant 
discovers the alleged error in his record.4  However, an application is also timely if submitted 
within three years of the decision of the DRB.5  The applicant submitted his application six years 
after  his  discharge  and  four  years  after  the  decision  of  the  DRB  in  his  case.    Therefore,  his 
application was untimely. 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552(b), the  Board may  excuse the untimeliness of an 
application if it is in the interest of justice to do so.  In Allen v. Card, 799 F. Supp. 158, 164 
(D.D.C. 1992), the court stated that to determine whether the interest of justice supports a waiver 
of the statute of limitations, the Board “should analyze both the reasons for the delay and the 
potential merits of the claim based on a cursory review.”6  The court further instructed that “the 
longer the delay has been and the weaker the reasons are for the delay, the more compelling the 
merits would need to be to justify a full review.”7   

1. 
 
2. 

 
3. 

 
4. 

 
5. 

 
6. 

The applicant argued that it is in the interest of justice for the Board to waive the 
statute of limitations because he is a member of the Coast Guard auxiliary and wants to enlist on 
active duty.  This argument and the reason for the applicant’s delay are unpersuasive.  However, 
the delay was not excessive, and a cursory review of the merits of this case indicates that the 
Coast Guard has admitted that the narrative reason for discharge on the applicant’s DD 214 is 
erroneous and prejudicial because of a change made by the DRB.  Therefore, the Board finds that 
it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations in this case. 

 
The applicant asked the Board to upgrade his RE-3G code to RE-1 so that he may 
reenlist on active duty without receiving a waiver.  He alleged that he no longer feels anxiety in 
enclosed spaces, such as train cars and elevators.  However, he submitted no evidence to support 
his allegation that he can comfortably tolerate enclosed spaces in stressful situations, as almost 
every military member must be able to do, whether in a tank, a plane, or a ship.  Therefore, the 
Board is not persuaded that the applicant’s reenlistment code should be upgraded to RE-1, which 
would  allow  him  to  reenlist  on  active  duty  without  proving  to  a  recruiter  that  he  can  tolerate 
enclosed spaces in stressful situations.   

The  Coast  Guard  reviewed  the  applicant’s  DD  214  and  noted  that  the  change 
made by the DRB to his narrative reason for separation in 2003 is not only contrary to policy but 
also unnecessarily derogatory.  The Coast Guard argued that under Article 1.E. of COMDTINST 

                                                 
4 10 U.S.C. § 1552(b). 
5 Ortiz v. Sec’y of Defense, 41 F.3d 738, 743 (D.C. Cir. 1994). 
6 See also Dickson v. Secretary of Defense, 68 F.3d 1396 (D.C. Cir. 1995). 
7 Allen v. Card, 799 F. Supp. 158, 164-5 (D.D.C. 1992).  See also Dickson v. Secretary of Defense, 68 F.3d 1396 
(D.C. Cir. 1995). 

M1900.4D, the applicant’s narrative reason for separation should be the more general category 
“Unsuitability” rather than the more specific “Personality  Disorder” shown in the SPD Hand-
book.  The Board agrees with the Coast Guard that the regulation authorizes the use of the more 
general category of discharge “Unsuitability,” rather than the specific subcategory “Personality 
Disorder” when a member has actually been diagnosed with a personality disorder. 

The Board’s review of the record, however, reveals a more significant error in this 
regard.  The applicant was discharged because he was diagnosed with “Specific Phobia, situa-
tional  type  (claustrophobia  –  fear  of  enclosed  spaces).”    However,  the  separation  authority, 
separation code, and narrative reason for separation shown his DD 214 indicate that he was dis-
charged because of a diagnosed personality disorder.  Neither the Coast Guard Medical Manual 
nor the DSM (which the Coast Guard relies on to diagnose psychiatric conditions)8 lists a spe-
cific phobia or claustrophobia as a personality disorder.  Instead, the Medical Manual and the 
DSM  classify  such  phobias  as  anxiety  disorders  or  panic  disorders,  which  are  not  personality 
disorders.9   Because the applicant was never diagnosed with a personality disorder, the Board 
finds that the narrative reason for separation (either “Unsuitability” or “Personality Disorder”); 
separation code (JFX, which denotes an involuntary discharge because of a diagnosed personal-
ity disorder); and separation authority (Article 12.B.16. of the Personnel Manual) shown on his 
DD 214 and DD 215 are erroneous, unjust, and unduly prejudicial.10 

Members  diagnosed  with  specific  phobias  may  be  administratively  separated 
under Article 12.B. of the Personnel Manual when the phobias interfere with the members’ per-
formance of duty.11  The applicant’s specific phobia clearly interfered with his duty in the Coast 
Guard because it stopped him from serving on a cutter, as all members must be able to do.  Arti-
cle  12.B.16.  of  the  Personnel  Manual,  which  is  the  separation  authority  for  “Unsuitability” 
discharges and is cited  on the applicant’s DD 214, authorizes the administrative separation of 
members diagnosed with a personality disorder, but the applicant was never diagnosed with a 
personality disorder.  Article 12.B.12., on the other hand, authorizes the administrative separation 
of members who have certain conditions that are not disabilities but that interfere with their per-
formance of duty.  The SPD Handbook even includes one situational phobia—fear of flying—as 
an example of the type of condition that may result in a discharge for “Condition, Not a Disabil-
ity” under Article 12.B.12. of the Personnel Manual.   

 
7. 

 
8. 

 
9. 

Although the applicant did not ask this Board to correct his separation code and 
narrative reason for separation, he did ask the DRB to remove the JFX and “Unsuitability” from 
his record and got the worse notation of “Personality Disorder” for his efforts.  In addition, the 
Coast Guard has had two opportunities to review the DD 214 and reconsider the denotation of 
his discharge.  Therefore and in light of the clear and prejudicial errors on the DD 214, the Board 
finds that it should be corrected to show that the applicant was discharged for a “Condition, Not 

                                                 
8 Coast Guard Medical Manual, Chap. 5.B.1. 
9 Coast Guard Medical Manual, Chaps. 5.B.2., 5.B.11.a.5.; DSM-IV-TR, pp. 443, 685. 
10 In light of the highly prejudicial nature of a discharge by reason of “personality disorder,” the Board has often 
ordered the Coast Guard to correct the narrative reason on a DD 214 to “condition, not a disability” or some other 
less prejudicial reason when the diagnosis of personality disorder was absent, uncertain, or not supported by inap-
propriate behavior.  See, e.g., BCMR Docket Nos. 2005-082, 2005-045, 2004-044, and 2003-015. 
11 Coast Guard Medical Manual, Chap. 5.B.11.a.5. 

a  Disability,”  under  Article  12.B.12.  of  the  Personnel  Manual,  with  the  corresponding  JFV 
separation code and RE-3G reenlistment code. 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request for an RE-1 code should be denied, but his 
DD 214 should be corrected to show “Condition, Not a Disability” as the narrative reason for 
separation, JFV as the separation code, an RE-3G reenlistment code, and Article 12.B.12. of the 
Personnel Manual as the separation authority.  Moreover, these corrections should be made on a 
newly  issued  DD  214,  rather  than  by  means  of  a  DD  215,  so  that  the  incorrect,  prejudicial 
information  suggesting  that  he  has  a  personality  disorder  need  not  be  seen  by  the  applicant’s 
future employers. 

 
10. 

 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

 
 

ORDER 

 

The  application  of  former  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCG,  for 
correction of his military record is denied, except that the Coast Guard shall correct his DD 214 
as follows: 

 
•  Block 25 on his DD 214 shall be corrected to show that he was discharged under the 
authority of Article 12.B.12. of the Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6A). 
 
•  Block 26 shall be corrected to show separation code JFV. 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

•  Block 27 shall continue to show code RE-3G. 
 
•  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 with these corrections made 
in the original (not by hand and not by issuing a DD 215). 
 
•  The following notation shall be made in block 18 of the new DD 214:  “Action taken 
pursuant to order of BCMR.” 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 
 Evan R. Franke 

 

 
 Robert S. Johnson 

 

 

 
 
 Adrian Sevier