DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

               Docket No: 4128-19  
   Ref: Signature Date  

From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records  
To:  Secretary of the Navy  

Ref: (a) 10 U.S.C. §1552 
     (b) USD Memo of 25 Aug 17 “Clarifying Guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records Considering 
         Requests by Veterans for Modification of their Discharge Due to Mental Health Conditions, Sexual Assault, or Sexual Harassment” 

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 with attachments 
      (2) Mental Health Condition Advisory Opinion, Docket No: NR20190004128 of 22 February 2020 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) requesting to change the reentry code on his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214).  Enclosures (1) and (2) apply. 

2.  The Board, consisting of                                                                          , reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 14 May 2020, and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record.  Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, relevant portions of his naval service and medical records, applicable statutes, regulations, policies, and an advisory opinion (AO) from a qualified mental health provider. 

3.  The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice finds as follows: 

    a.  Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy. 

     b. The Petitioner enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active service on 2 February 2016.  On 24 June 2016, Petitioner underwent a psychiatric evaluation and was diagnosed with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood.  The physician stated that Petitioner’s disorder was of such severity as to interfere with his ability to adequately serve in the United States Navy, and that such condition would not improve with prolonged psychiatric  attention.  On 6 July 2016, the Commanding Officer of Naval Hospital               noted that the clinical opinion was that Petitioner’s condition was severe and not expected to improve with psychiatric attention in a military setting.  On 7 July 2016, the Petitioner received a written counselling warning documenting his mental health disorder. 

     c.  On 3 August 2016, Petitioner was notified of proposed administrative separation (Adsep) proceedings by reason of convenience of the government due to physical or mental conditions of such severity as to render the Petitioner incapable of serving adequately in the naval service.  Based on Petitioner’s years of service, he was not entitled to an Adsep board, and the lowest eligible discharge characterization possible was honorable, unless a general (under honorable conditions) discharge was warranted.  Ultimately, on 2 September 2016, Petitioner was discharged from the Navy with an honorable discharge and an RE-4 reentry code.  The Board specifically noted on Petitioner’s DD Form 214 that the narrative reason for separation is “Condition Not a Disability,” (CND) and the separation code is “JFV,” which corresponds to an Adsep case involving a CND.  

     d.   As part of the review process, a Navy Medical Corps Officer (MCO) who is also a licensed clinical psychologist, reviewed Petitioner’s contentions and the available records, and issued an AO dated 22 February 2020.  The MCO noted that the Petitioner’s military mental health provider diagnosed him with an adjustment disorder with anxiety and depressed mood.  The MCO concluded by opining that there was evidence to attribute the Petitioner’s reentry code to his service-connected mental health condition.   

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concluded that Petitioner’s request warrants relief.  Additionally, the Board reviewed his application under the guidance provided in reference (b).  Specifically, the Board considered whether his application was the type that was intended to be covered by this policy. 

The Board determined a change to Petitioner’s reentry/reenlistment code is warranted to “RE­3G.” This reentry code corresponds to: “condition (not a physical disability) interfering with the performance of duty,” and is the appropriate designation in the Petitioner’s case absent any evidence to the contrary. The Board noted that the RE-3G reentry code may not prohibit reenlistment, but requires that a waiver be obtained.  Recruiting personnel are responsible for determining whether Petitioner meets the standards for reenlistment and whether or not a request for a waiver of the reentry code is feasible. 

RECOMMENDATION: 

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. 

That Petitioner’s reentry/reenlistment code be changed to “RE-3G.” 

That a copy of this report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record. 

That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the Board on 16 April 2019.    

4.  It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter. 

5.  Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations, Section 723.6(e)), and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 


6/4/2020