Docket No.  
Ref: Signature Date

 
Dear  : 
 
This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552.  After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.  Consequently, your application has been denied.   
 
Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits.  A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 18 June 2020.  The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.  Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, relevant portions of your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. 
 
Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined that a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to their understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. 
 
You enlisted in the Navy on 16 September 2002.  On your pre-enlistment medical paperwork and physical, you denied any mental health history and any psychiatric abnormalities.  While at boot camp, on 23 September 2002 the Medical Department referred you to the Recruit Evaluation Unit (REU) for a mental health evaluation.  During your examination, you reported an anger management problem as well as undergoing pre-service mental health treatment.  The REU requested you to obtain your civilian mental health records for review and evaluation.  Upon receiving your civilian medical records, on 1 October 2002 the REU reevaluated you.  Your civilian treatment records corroborated your self-report and indicated you had previously underwent mental health treatment that included the use of psychotropic medication (both Paxil and Prozac), as well as a hospitalization in 2001.  The REU Medical Officer diagnosed you with:  (a) an impulse-control disorder not otherwise specified, existing prior to entry (EPTE), and (b) a major depressive disorder EPTE.  The REU Medical Officer recommended your administrative entry level separation due to a disqualifying psychiatric condition. 
 
On 3 October 2002, administrative discharge action was initiated by reason of defective enlistment and induction due to erroneous enlistment.  The factual basis for the erroneous enlistment was your major depressive disorder and impulse-control disorder diagnoses that existed pre-service.  You elected not to consult with counsel or submit a written rebuttal statement for consideration by the separation authority, and you waived your right to General Court-Martial Convening Authority review of your discharge.  Ultimately, after serving only twenty-three days on active duty, on 8 October 2002 you were discharged from the Navy with an uncharacterized entry level separation, and assigned a separation code of “JFC” and an “RE-4” reentry code.  The “JFC” separation code corresponds to the narrative reason for separation of “erroneous entry,” and is the appropriate designation in erroneous enlistment cases involving a pre-existing medical condition or mental health history such as yours that would be disqualifying for active duty service.  In this regard, you were assigned the correct characterization, separation code, and reentry code based on your factual situation as you were still within your first 180 days of continuous military service and had not yet completed boot camp.   
 
The Board carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as your contentions that included, but were not limited to:  (a) your discharge was due to PTSD experienced in the Navy as well as symptoms worsened by the experiences you endured, (b) you are enduring more trauma and stress beyond necessary for requesting a certificate of eligibility for the purchase of a home, (c) you are requesting your discharge be upgraded to the medical discharge you were separated for, (d) you have waited seventeen years to finally be considered a veteran and that your time counts towards VA benefits, and (e) your PTSD was undiagnosed and is the reason for your current VA disability award.  However, the Board concluded these factors and contentions were not sufficient to warrant changing your narrative reason for separation, reentry code, or granting any other relief.   
 
The Board unequivocally determined that you had a legal, moral and ethical obligation to remain truthful on your enlistment paperwork.  Had you properly and fully disclosed your depressive disorder and mental health history, you would have been disqualified from enlisting.  The Board concluded that your intentional failure to disclose such basic and critical mental health history could also have formed the basis of a fraudulent enlistment charge prior to your administrative separation.  The Board also determined that, even with applying the liberal consideration standard, there is insufficient evidence to support a nexus between any purported PTSD and the basis of your discharge. Accordingly, the Board concluded that your discharge was based on your failure to disclose pre-service disqualifying mental health conditions resulting in an erroneous enlistment and not PTSD.  In the end, the Board concluded that you received the correct discharge type, characterization, narrative reason, and reentry code based on the totality of your circumstances, and that such action was in accordance with all Department of the Navy directives and policy at the time of your discharge.   
 
The Board also noted that although you somehow have obtained a VA disability rating, such VA eligibility determinations for health care, disability compensation, and other VA-administered benefits are for their internal VA purposes only.  Moreover, such VA eligibility determinations are not binding on the Department of the Navy and have absolutely no bearing on previous active duty service discharge characterizations and corresponding references on a DD Form 214.    
 
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken.  You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149.  New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board.  In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.  Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. 
 
Sincerely,                                                                              

9/13/2020

Executive Director