DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
BCMR Docket No. 2009-138
FINAL DECISION
This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section 425 of
title 14 of the United States Code. The Chair docketed the case after receiving the applicant’s
completed application on May 4, 2009, 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 December 18, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly
APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS
The applicant asked the Board to correct his discharge form DD 214 to reflect the fact
that on February 27, 1993, he was released from active duty (RELAD) into the Reserve instead of
being discharged. The applicant stated that he was RELAD into the Individual Ready Reserve
(IRR) upon his separation from active duty. However, because this fact is not shown on his DD
214, the U.S. Army, in which he is now serving on active duty, is seeking a “fifteen-year
overpayment” from him based on an alleged miscalculation of his time in service.
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
On May 16, 1988, the applicant signed a Statement of Understanding in which he
obligated himself to serve for eight years in either the Coast Guard or the Coast Guard Reserve.
Also on May 16, 1988, the applicant signed a four-year contract enlisting on active duty in the
regular Coast Guard. The contract states that his military service obligation was incurred that
day and would be completed on May 15, 1996, eight years later. A print-out from the Coast
Guard’s pay database also shows that his “expected loss date” was May 15, 1996.
The applicant’s DD 214, however, bears “NA” (not applicable) notations in block 6,
which is supposed to show the year, month, and day of his Reserve Obligation Termination Date
and the word “Discharged” in block 23, instead of the phrase “Released From Active Duty.”
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On August 19, 2009, the Coast Guard submitted an advisory opinion recommending that
the Board correct the applicant’s DD 214 to show that he was “Released From Active Duty” in
block 23 and the termination date of his military service obligation, May 15, 1996, in block 6.
The Coast Guard stated that the applicant incurred an eight-year military service obligation on
May 16, 1988, and was placed in the IRR upon his release from active duty on February 27,
1993.
RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On September 1, 2009, the Chair sent the applicant a copy of the views of the Coast
Guard and invited him to submit a response within 30 days. No response was received.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Board makes the following findings and conclusions based on the applicant’s mili-
tary record and submissions, the Coast Guard’s submission, and applicable law:
The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.
Under 10 U.S.C. § 1552(b) and 33 C.F.R. § 52.22, an application to the Board
must be filed within three years after the applicant discovers, or reasonably should have
discovered, the alleged error or injustice. The applicant received his DD 214 in 1993 and should
have noticed the errors at that time. Therefore, his application is 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. Because the applicant’s DD 214 is clearly
erroneous and the errors may cause him a financial hardship, the Board finds that it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the untimeliness of the application.
The applicant’s enlistment documents clearly show that he obligated himself to
eight years of military service in the Coast Guard or Coast Guard Reserve on May 16, 1988.
Therefore, block 6 of his DD 214 should show as the termination date of his military service
obligation the date May 15, 1996, rather than “NA”, and block 23 should show that he was
“Released From Active Duty” on February 27, 1993, rather than “Discharged.”
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Accordingly, relief should be granted.
[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]
ORDER
The application of former SK3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his
military record is granted. The Coast Guard shall correct his DD 214 to show the date May 15,
1996, in block 6 and to show that he was “Released From Active Duty” in block 23.
Julia Andrews
*
Dorothy J. Ulmer
*The third member of the Board was unavailable. However, pursuant to 33 C.F.R. § 52.11(b),
two designated members constitute a quorum of the Board.
The Page 7 with the Affiliation Agreement dated April 2, 2007, and the promise of the $8,200 Affiliation Bonus, which the applicant submitted, was not included in the copy of his military record provided to the Board by the Coast Guard. To be eligible to receive a bonus for SELRES affiliation a person: a. must be released from active duty (RELAD) under honorable conditions from the Coast Guard or another military service; b. must be eligible for reenlistment or for extension of his or her...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-119
However, the Coast Guard’s database Direct Access shows that the applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard. The applicant asserted that Direct Access is in error or unjust because he was not counseled at the time of separation that he was being discharged; that he did not request discharge on his career intentions worksheet that was prepared prior to his separation; and that his DD 214 showed release from active duty with a remaining reserve obligation. The counseling he received from...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-159
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. The applicant stated that the affidavit from his relative that she remembers the applicant completing papers of his intent to remain in the Inactive Reserve, his own statement in this regard, and a copy of his 2002 letter requesting to affiliate with the drilling Reserve rebut the Coast Guard’s contention that there is no official record or...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2012-067
Claims for erroneous payments which may be waived in whole or in part, must have resulted from an erroneous overpayment. After his ROTD was corrected, his record showed that he was no longer a member of the Coast Guard or Coast Guard Reserve as of August 18, 2008, and so was not entitled to the drill pay he received thereafter. The Coast Guard recommends, in essence, that the Board order that the appli- cant’s record be corrected to show that his debt has been waived pursuant to Chapter 11.F.
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-054
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD On September 8, 1986, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve for eight years. The applicant stated that she was transferred to the IRR because of downsizing and unit disbandment and that the letter she received dated November 21, 1995, “said it all and it should be considered.” The letter told her that she would receive more information soon, but she did not. The letter dated November 21, 1995, however, supports the applicant’s contention that she was...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2011-077
The PSC stated that although the applicant served in the Coast Guard Reserve from August 19, 1985, until his eight-year enlistment expired on August 18, 1993, he never completed more than 90 days of continuous active duty and so is not entitled to a DD 214. However, his military records, which are presumptively correct,2 show that he never performed continuous active duty for a period of 90 days or longer and so is not entitled to a DD 214.3 However, reservists without DD 214s may receive...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2011-165
His DD 214, which he signed, also shows in blocks 23 through 28 that he was honorably released from active duty due to “completion of required active service” and, in block 29, that he had no “time lost.” Block 12 contains the following entries, in pertinent part: 12. The PSC noted that the applicant does not contest his dates of enlistment or discharge and alleged that the calculation of his time net active service in block 12.c. [ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] ORDER The...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2007-134
On June 3, 2005, the applicant signed a Page 7 documenting that he had been counseled that he was eligible for a $10,000 SELRES affiliation bonus, pursuant to ALCOAST 293/05, if he joined the SELRES and extended his Reserve obligation from December 12, 2008, through August 16, 2009. The record indicates that the applicant was counseled with a Page 7 on June 3, 2005, that he was eligible to extend his enlistment to receive a $10,000 SELRES affiliation bonus pursuant to ALCOAST 293/05 if he...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-017
On March 30, 2006, while serving on active duty in Bahrain, the applicant was counseled on a CG-3307 (“Page 7”) about his eligibility for a SELRES Affiliation Bonus as follows: I have been advised that I am eligible for an $1,800.00 dollar SELRES Affiliation Bonus. The JAG asked, “Why would Applicant accept a $1,400 SELRES affiliation bonus, when he could have waited to enlist at the end of the following month and receive a $6,000 prior ser- vice enlistment bonus for a six-year SELRES...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2010-001
APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a health services technician who was released from active duty into the Reserve on July 24, 2008, asked the Board to correct her record to reinstate her on active duty and to order the Coast Guard to process her under the Coast Guard’s Physical Disability Evalua- tion System (PDES) prior to her release from active duty (RELAD). A cursory review reveals that her medical records reflect the symptoms and diagnoses claimed in the application...