DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 1999-185 
 
 

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Attorney-Advisor: 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  under  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title 10 and section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  The BCMR received 
the application for correction on September 24, 1999, and docketed the case on 
November 8, 1999, upon receipt of the applicant’s military records. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  July  26,  2000,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

 
 
The applicant, a former seaman apprentice (SA) in the Coast Guard, asked 
the  Board  to  correct  his  military  record  by  upgrading  the  reenlistment  code, 
separation code, and narrative reason for separation on his discharge form (DD 
214) so that he would be eligible to reenlist.  He was discharged on October 11, 
199x, with an RE-4 reenlistment code (ineligible for reenlistment), a JMB separa-
tion code (unsuitable due to a personality disorder), and “unsuitability” as the 
narrative reason for separation shown on his DD 214. 
 

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  discharged  in  199x  because  he  was 
immature,  “made  some  mistakes,”  and  “open[ed]  [his]  mouth  when  it  should 
have been closed.”  He stated that he was suffering from a hangover one morn-
ing  when  a  petty  officer  told  him  it  was  society’s  fault  that  he  was  alive.    He 
alleged  that,  because  he  responded,  “I  can  solve  society’s  problem,”  he  was 
deemed suicidal and discharged for “unsuitability.”  He alleged that he was not 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 

actually  suicidal  but  “went  along  with”  the  recommendation  for  discharge 
because he thought he wanted out of the Coast Guard.  However, he alleged, he 
has regretted the decision ever since and is asking the Board for a second chance.  
The applicant stated that he wants his reenlistment code changed so that he can 
join  the  Army  National  Guard.    He  indicated  that  he  did  not  apply  for  relief 
sooner because he did not know about the BCMR. 
 
 
The  applicant  submitted  with  his  application  two  statements  signed  by 
supervisors at the retail store where he works.  An assistant manager of the store 
stated that the applicant had been employed at the store since June 1997 and cur-
rently holds the position of department manager.  The assistant manager stated 
that “[h]is character and mental state are sound” but noted that “he does realize 
his area of improvement and is currently working to correct those areas.” 
 
 
A co-director of the store wrote that the applicant is “extremely coopera-
tive and responsible” and “has a lot of potential to be whatever he chooses.” He 
noted that the applicant’s recent performance evaluation was “average.” 
 

 
On April 11, 1990, the applicant joined the Coast Guard Reserve under the 
delayed entry program.  On August 21, 1990, he enlisted in the Coast Guard for a 
term of four years.  After training, he was assigned to the cutter xxxxxxx, based 
in xxxxxx.   
 
 
On March 5, 199x, the applicant was admitted to a xxxxxx hospital on an 
emergency basis because of suicidal threats and “a couple of suicidal gestures” 
that did not result in any injury.  The applicant reported to the doctor that he had 
begun  to  experience  blackouts  due  to  drinking  too  much  alcohol.    The  doctor 
diagnosed sporadic alcohol abuse and an unspecified personality disorder.  The 
applicant  told  the  doctor  he  would  kill  himself  if  he  was  not  reassigned  or 
discharged from the Coast Guard.  Therefore, he was hospitalized for three days 
and referred, upon discharge, to the xxxxxxxx Medical Center for an assessment 
of his fitness for duty.   
 
 
On March 8, 199x, the applicant was admitted to the xxxx Medical Center 
for psychiatric evaluation.  He told his doctor that he was drinking too much and 
had occasionally thought about suicide.  He reported having put a knife to his 
throat and to threaten suicide on two occasions.  On March 17, 199x, the doctor 
diagnosed him with alcohol abuse and borderline personality disorder.  He was 
referred  to  out-patient  therapy  and  an  alcohol  rehabilitation  program.    In 
addition,  the  doctor  recommended  that  he  be  administratively  discharged 

because his personality disorder would probably lead to continuing behavioral 
and performance problems. 
 
On March 28, 199x, he was awarded non-judicial punishment (NJP) at a 
 
captain’s mast for “a variety of offenses,” including writing a check for a car loan 
on a closed account, sleeping on duty during wartime, and being absent without 
leave  from  February  5,  199x,  to  February  7,  199x.    The  NJP  included  a  special 
written  performance  evaluation  in  which  he  received  a  mark  of  1  for  personal 
hygiene (on a scale of 1 to 7, with 7 being highest) and marks of 2 for conduct, 
teamwork,  knowledge,  work  habits,  workmanship,  requiring  supervision, 
stamina, professionalism, motivation towards advancement, motivation towards 
job, and integrity.  In addition, he received marks of 3 for seven other perform-
ance categories.  
 

The written evaluation noted that at the mast, the applicant stated that he 
was not suited for military life and asked to be discharged.  In light of this state-
ment  and  his  poor  performance,  his  commanding  officer  (CO)  wrote  on  the 
evaluation  that  he  would  initiate  action  to  discharge  him  in  accordance  with 
Article 12.B.16. of the Personnel Manual. 
 
 
On April 8, 199x, the CO formally notified him that he was initiating his 
discharge under Article 12.B.16.  The CO based his decision on the matters noted 
at the captain’s mast and on his diagnosed borderline personality disorder.  The 
applicant signed a statement indicating that he did not want to make a statement 
on his own behalf, did not object to being discharged, and waived any right to a 
probationary period. 
 
 
On  April  10,  199x,  the  CO  recommended  to  the  Commandant  that  the 
applicant be honorably discharged under Article 12.B.16. based on five violations 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and on his psychiatric diagnosis.  The CO 
noted that after the Coast Guard advanced the applicant the money to pay off the 
first  discovered  bad  check,  he  used  the  money  for  other  purposes.    He  also 
indicated that the applicant had “a history of making suicide threats.”  On April 
29,  199x,  the  CO’s  recommendation  was  approved  and  forwarded  to  the 
Commandant  by  the Commander  of  the  Maintenance  and  Logistics  Command 
xxxxx based on the applicant’s psychiatric diagnosis. 
 
 
On May 7, 199x, the Commandant ordered the expedited discharge of the 
applicant under Article 12.B.16., with a separation code of JMB and a narrative 
reason for separation of “unsuitability.”  The orders required the applicant to be 
discharged within 30 days.  However, before he was discharged, it was discov-
ered that he had written more bad checks.  Therefore, on June 11, 199x, he was 
taken to mast and sentenced to 45 days of restriction and 45 days of extra duty. 

 
 
In late July 199x, the applicant complained of abdominal pain and it was 
determined that he may have reinjured a right inguinal hernia for which he had 
undergone surgery in January 1990, prior to his enlistment.  He was referred for 
evaluation and surgery.   
 
 
On  September  19,  199x,  the  applicant’s  CO  made  an  Administrative 
Remarks  (“page  7”)  entry  in  his  record  stating  that,  while  the  applicant  was 
assigned to Group xxxx pending discharge  after his first mast and NJP, it was 
discovered that he had written more bad checks.  Therefore, his discharge was 
cancelled  and  he  was  returned  to  the  xxxx  “for  punishment  and  to  attempt  to 
bring about restitution.”  However, he suffered an injury while assigned to the 
cutter and was reassigned to Group xxxxx for “treatment and final disposition.”  
While  reassigned  to  Group  xxxxx,  he  again  wrote  “worthless  checks”  and 
“amassed a telephone bill of upwards of $750,” which he apparently could not 
pay.  The page 7 states that if the applicant wrote any more bad checks after that 
date, he would be court-martialed and subject to confinement, forfeiture of pay 
and allowances, and a bad conduct or dishonorable discharge.  It indicates that 
his discharge was being delayed pending surgery. 
 

On October 3, 199x, surgery on the applicant’s right inguinal hernia was 
canceled at the last minute after he told the surgeon that he had not suffered any 
pain for the previous two months.  He was discharged on October 11, 199x, with 
an  RE-4  reenlistment  code,  a  JMB  separation  code,  and  a  narrative  reason  for 
separation of “unsuitability.” 
 

 
On  June  16,  2000,  the  Chief  Counsel  of  the  Coast  Guard  submitted  an 
advisory  opinion  recommending  that  the  Board  deny  the  requested  relief  for 
untimeliness and lack of merit.  
 
 
The  Chief  Counsel  argued  that  relief  should  be  denied  for  untimeliness 
because the applicant knew or should have known about the alleged errors on 
his DD 214 when he signed it at the time of his discharge.  Therefore, his applica-
tion  arrived  almost  five  years  after the  Board’s  three-year  statute  of  limitation.  
The Chief Counsel further argued that the applicant provided “no valid reason 
for his delay.” 
 
 
The  Chief  Counsel  also  argued  that  relief  should  be  denied  because  the 
applicant  admitted  that  he  made  “mistakes”  and  failed  to  allege  any  error  or 
injustice  on  the  part  of  the  Coast  Guard.    The  Chief  Counsel  stated  that  the 
record proves that the Coast Guard followed all proper procedures with respect 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

to the applicant’s medical evaluations and discharge.  He alleged that a member 
diagnosed with a borderline personality disorder is qualified for an administra-
tive  discharge  because  the  disorder  does  not  constitute  a  physical  disability 
under  Article  5.B.2.j.  of  the  Medical  Manual.    He  further  alleged  that  the 
reenlistment  code,  separation  code,  and  narrative  reason  for  separation  shown 
on the applicant’s DD 214 were properly assigned in accordance with regulation.   
 

The Chief Counsel argued that the applicant submitted no evidence indi-
cating  that  his  diagnosed  borderline  personality  disorder  no  longer  exists.    He 
alleged that the two supporting statements submitted by the applicant “suggest 
[he] continues to grapple with the same condition that led to his separation.” 

 
The  Chief  Counsel  stated  that  the  case  “involves  a  significant  issue  of 
Coast  Guard  policy.”    Therefore,  action  by  the  Board  other  than  denial  would 
constitute a recommendation subject to final action by the delegate of the Secre-
tary under 33 C.F.R. § 52.62. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On June 16, 2000, the Chairman sent the applicant a copy of the views of 
the Coast Guard and invited him to respond within 15 days.  The applicant did 
not respond. 
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 

 
Article 12.B.16. of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual authorizes enlisted 
personnel to be discharged by reason of unsuitability at the direction of the Com-
mandant for inaptitude, personality disorders, apathy, defective attitudes, inabil-
ity  to  expend  effort  constructively,  unsanitary  habits,  alcohol  abuse,  financial 
irresponsibility, or sexual harassment.  Article 12.B.16.b. of the Personnel Manual 
authorizes unsuitability discharges for members diagnosed with one of the “per-
sonality behavior disorders …  listed in Chapter 5, CG Medical Manual … .”  
 

Chapter 5.B.2 of the Medical Manual (COMDTINST M6000.1B) lists per-
sonality disorders that qualify a member for administrative discharge pursuant 
to Article 12 of the Personnel Manual.  The list includes borderline personality 
disorders.  Chapter  5.B.2.j.    Chapter  3.F.16.c provides  that  personality  disorders 
“may  render  an  individual  administratively  unfit  [for  duty]  rather  than  unfit 
because  of  a  physical  impairment.    Interference  with  performance  of  effective 
duty will be dealt with through appropriate administrative channels (see Section 
5-B).” 
 

 
COMDTINST M1900.4C, the instruction for completing discharge forms in 
effect  in  1991,  states  that  a  member’s  DD  214  should  show  a  separation  code, 
reenlistment code, and narrative reason for separation as stated in the discharge 
orders  issued  by  the  Military  Personnel  Command  or  as  shown  in  the 
instruction. 
 Article  2.C.  of  the  instruction  states  that  members  who  are 
involuntarily discharged because of a personality disorder that does not amount 
to a disability shall be assigned a separation code of JMB, a narrative reason for 
separation of “unsuitability,” and a reenlistment code of RE-4 or RE-3G.  An RE-
3G code means the discharged member is eligible for reenlistment except for a 
“condition (not a physical disability) interfering with 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: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to sec-

tion 1552 of title 10 of the United States Code.  

1. 

 
2. 

 
3. 

 
4. 

An application to the Board must be filed within three years after 
the  applicant  discovers  the  alleged  error  in  his  record.  10  U.S.C.  §  1552.  The 
record indicates that the applicant signed and received his discharge documents 
in October 199x.  Therefore, the Board finds that the applicant knew or should 
have known the nature of his separation and non-eligibility for reenlistment in 
199x.  Thus, his application was untimely by almost xx years. 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552, the Board may waive the three-year 
statute  of  limitations  if  it  is  in  the  interest  of  justice  to  do  so.    To  determine 
whether it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations, the Board 
should conduct a cursory review of the merits of the case.  Allen v. Card, 799 F. 
Supp. 158, 164 (D.D.C. 1992).   

A cursory review of the merits of this case indicates that the appli-
cant was diagnosed with a borderline personality disorder by two psychiatrists 
in March 199x and was properly discharged for unsuitability pursuant to Article 
12.B.16. of the Personnel Manual and Chapter 5 of the Medical Manual.  The RE-
4 reenlistment code, JMB separation code, and narrative reason for separation of 
“unsuitability”  shown  on  the  applicant’s  DD  214  were  fully  supported  by  the 
applicant’s psychiatric diagnosis and record of very poor performance and irre-
sponsibility.  Therefore, the Board finds that it is not in the interest of justice to 
waive the statute of limitations in this case. 
 

5. 

 
Moreover,  even  if  one  assumes  that  not  knowing  of  the  Board’s 
existence is a valid excuse for untimeliness, the Board finds that the applicant has 
not proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Coast Guard committed 
any error or injustice  when it assigned him the codes and  narrative reason for 
separation shown on his DD 214.  The applicant alleged that his discharge was 
caused  by  mere  “immaturity,”    but  his  military  and  medical  records  strongly 
rebut his contention.  The two statements from civilian supervisors submitted by 
the applicant do not prove that his diagnosis was wrong or that he has become 
suitable for military service. 
 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should  be denied based both 

on its untimeliness and on the lack of merit in his claim. 

6. 

  

 
 
 

 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

 
 

 

ORDER 

The  application  of  XXXXXXXXXX,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his  military 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Robert C. Ashby 

 

 

 
James K. Augustine 

 

 

 
 
Angel Collaku 

 

 
 

record is hereby denied.