DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 1999-065 
 
 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Attorney-Advisor: 
 
 
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 BCMR 
docketed  the  case  on  February  23,  1999,  upon  receipt  of  the  applicant’s  com-
pleted application.  
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  December  9,  1999,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

 
 
The  applicant,  a  xxxxxxxx  now retired  from  the  Coast  Guard,  asked  the 
Board to correct his record by changing the narrative reason for separation on his 
discharge  form  (DD  214)  from  “non-selection,  permanent  promotion”  to 
“voluntary  retirement.”    He  also  asked  the  Board  to  change  his  separation 
program designator (SPD) code from SGB, which means “mandatory retirement 
required  by  law  when  a  commissioned  or  warrant  officer  was  not  selected  for 
permanent promotion,” to RBD, which means “voluntary retirement authorized 
but not required by law when a member has attained sufficient service to retire.” 
  

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The  applicant  alleged  that  when  xxxx  fail  of  selection  to  the  rank  of 
xxxxxxxxx  twice,  they  are  supposed  to  receive  letters  from  the  selection  board 
informing them that, if they wish to be retired rather than discharged for failure 
of  selection,  they  must  submit  a  letter  requesting  voluntary  retirement.    The 
applicant stated that he never received the letter.  He alleged that the only formal 

notification of his second failure of selection that he received was his detachment 
and travel orders.  The orders did not contain the information about having to 
submit a letter requesting voluntary retirement.   
 

The  applicant  stated  that  he  never  requested  retirement  because  he 
assumed he would automatically receive “retirement” as his narrative reason for 
separation since he was being retired after having completed more than 20 years 
of active duty.  The applicant stated that having “non-selection, permanent pro-
motion”  on  his  DD  214  was  likely  to  prejudice  prospective  employers  against 
hiring him. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On November 3, 1999, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard submitted an 
 
advisory opinion in which he recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s 
request for relief.   
 

The  Chief  Counsel  attached  to  his  advisory  opinion  a  memorandum  on 
the  case  prepared  by  the  Coast  Guard  Personnel  Command  (CGPC).    CGPC 
explained that although a letter formally notifying the applicant of his option to 
request  voluntary  retirement  was  prepared  and  sent  to  the  applicant  via  his 
chain  of  command,  it  “became  misrouted  between  CGPC  and  [the  applicant].”  
Therefore, the applicant was not informed that he had to make a written request 
in order to have his DD 214 reflect voluntary retirement rather than mandatory 
retirement for failing to be promoted.  CGPC recommended that the Chief Coun-
sel  recommend  that  the  Board  grant  the  applicant  relief  by  changing  his  SPD 
code  to  RBD  and  his  narrative  reason  for  separation  to  “sufficient  service  for 
retirement,” in accordance with the SPD Handbook. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve on July 23, 19xx.  He 
was discharged in order to join the Coast Guard on September 30, 19xx.  On Feb-
ruary 2, 19xx, he received a “temporary commission” as an ensign.  He was pro-
moted  to  lieutenant  junior  grade  on  August  27,  19xx.    On  May  13,  19xx,  he 
received a permanent commission as an officer in the Coast Guard.  On August 
27, 19xx, he was promoted to the rank of xxxxxx. 
 
 
In  199x  and  199x,  the  applicant  was  passed  over  for  promotion  by  the 
xxxxx selection board.  Therefore, under 14 U.S.C. § 283, he was scheduled for 
retirement on June 30, 199x.   
 

On September 29, 199x, CGPC sent the applicant a letter via his chain of 
command to notify him that he had failed of selection a second time and would 
be  retired.    The  letter states  that  “you  may request  voluntary  retirement  on  or 
before 1 July 199x under the provisions of [14 U.S.C. § 291].”  It is unclear in the 
record why this letter apparently was never received by the applicant. 

 
On June 30, 199x, the applicant was retired from the Coast Guard with an 
SPD code of SGB and a narrative reason for separation of “non-selection, perma-
nent  promotion.”    He  had  completed  23  years  and  9  months  on  active  duty, 
including over 11 years of active commissioned service. 
 

 
 
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 concerning this matter pursuant to sec-

tion 1552 of title 10 of the United States Code.  The application was timely. 
 

2. 

The  applicant  alleged  that  he  never  received  a  letter  from  CGPC 
dated  September  29,  199x,  which  informed  him  that  he  had  to  make  a  written 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 
Title 14 U.S.C. § 283 requires a lieutenant “who has failed of selection for 
 
promotion to the grade of lieutenant commander for the second time shall: (1) be 
honorably discharged on June 30 of the promotion year in which his failure of 
selection  occurs;  or  (2)  if  he  so  requests,  be  honorably  discharged  at  an  earlier 
date without loss of benefits …; or (3) if, on the date specified for his discharge in 
this section, he has completed at least 20 years of active service or is eligible for 
retirement under any law, be retired on that date … .” 
 
 
Title 14 U.S.C. § 291 states that “[a]ny regular commissioned officer who 
has  completed  twenty  years’  active  service  in  the  Coast  Guard  …,  at  least  ten 
years of which shall have been active commissioned service, may, upon his own 
application, in the discretion of the President, be retired from active service.”  
 
 
The  SPD  Handbook  states  that  officers  whose  “voluntary  retirement  [is] 
authorized but not required by law when a member has attained sufficient serv-
ice to retire” shall receive an RBD separation code and the narrative reason for 
separation  “sufficient  service  for  retirement.”    There  is  no  narrative  reason  for 
separation called “voluntary retirement” authorized under the SPD Handbook. 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

request to be retired in order to have “voluntarily retired” appear as the narra-
tive  reason  for  separation  on  his  DD  214  instead  of  “non-selection,  permanent 
promotion.”  He alleged that if he had been properly informed, he would have 
requested  voluntary  retirement.    The  applicant  further  alleged  that  it  was  an 
injustice for the latter reason for separation and the SPD code SGB to appear on 
his DD 214 because it might prejudice prospective employers against hiring him 
and because he had qualified for voluntary retirement. 

The Coast Guard indicated that the letter informing the applicant of 
his right to request voluntary retirement had gone astray.  The Coast Guard rec-
ommended that the Board grant the applicant relief by changing his SPD code to 
RBD and his narrative reason for separation to “sufficient service for retirement.” 

Due to an administrative error, the applicant was not informed that 
he was required to request voluntary retirement in order to avoid having “non-
selection, permanent promotion” appear on his DD 214.  Under 14 U.S.C. §§ 283 
and  291,  the  applicant  was  eligible  for  a  voluntary  retirement  after  his  second 
failure  of  selection  to  xxxxxx.    If  the  applicant  had  been  informed  that  he  was 
required  to  make  a  formal  request  for  a  voluntary  retirement,  he  would  have 
done so. 

There  is  no  narrative  reason  for  separation  of  “voluntary  retire-
ment”  authorized  by  the  SPD  Handbook.    Officers  in  the  applicant’s  situation 
who request voluntary retirement after failing of selection twice usually receive 
the narrative reason “sufficient service for retirement” along with the RBD sepa-
ration code. 

 
3. 

 
4. 

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
5. 

 
6. 

Accordingly,  the  relief  recommended  by  the  Coast  Guard  should 

be granted. 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

ORDER 

 

 

The  application  for  correction  of  the  military  record  of  XXXXXXXXXX, 

Block 26 on the applicant’s DD 214 dated June 30, 199x, shall be changed 

Block 28 on the DD 214 shall be changed from “non-selection, permanent 

 
 

 
 

 
 

USCG, is hereby granted as follows: 
 
 
from SGB to RBD. 
 
 
promotion” to “sufficient service for retirement.” 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 
Mark A. Holmstrup 

 

 

 
 
Pamela M. Pelcovits 

 

 

 
David M. Wiegand