DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2012-123 
 
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
 
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  Chair  docketed  the  application  upon 
receipt of the applicant’s completed application on April 14, 2012, and assigned it to staff mem-
ber J. Andrews to prepare the decision for the Board as required by 33 CFR § 52.61(c), with the 
assistance of staff member D. Hale. 
 
 
bers who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated February 1, 2013, is signed by the three duly appointed mem-

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
 The applicant, a seaman (SN) currently serving on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked 
the  Board  to  correct  his  record  to  show  that  he  had  no  break  in  service  from  his  original 
enlistment on September 24, 2007, until his discharge on June 27, 2010.  Specifically, he asked 
the  Board  to  remove  from  his  record  his  discharge  form  DD  214  dated  July  23,  2009,  and  his 
July 24, 2009, 2-year reenlistment contract.  He alleged that it was erroneous for the Coast Guard 
to discharge him on July 23, 2009, and immediately reenlist him the following day.    
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on September 24, 2007, obligating himself to 
serve  6  years  of  active  duty,  through  September  23,  2013.    His  record  contains  emails  which 
show  that  following  his  acceptance  to  a  Coast  Guard  Academy  preparatory  school  through  the 
Coast Guard Academy Scholar Program,1 the Enlisted Personnel Management Branch (EPM-1) 
of  the  Coast  Guard  Personnel  Service  Center  advised  him  that  each  member  accepting  an 
appointment to the one-year program had to submit a letter requesting to be released from active 

                                                 
1 Coast Guard Academy Scholar cadet candidates study for ten months at a military preparatory school specified by 
the Superintendent of the Coast Guard Academy.  Article 1.4.a. of COMDTINST 5354.2. 

 

 

duty pursuant to Article 12.B.12.a.2. of the Personnel Manual.2  On June 24, 2009, the applicant 
submitted a letter to EPM-1 asking to be released from active duty so he could attend the school. 
 
 
On July 6, 2009, the applicant received a letter from  the Coast Guard Academy Scholar 
Program  manager,  congratulating  him  on  being  selected  as  an  Academy  scholar.    The  letter 
ordered  him  to  report  to  the  Coast  Guard  Academy  on  July  24,  2009,  before  reporting  to  the 
xxxxxxxxxxxxx.    Although  the  applicant’s  original  enlistment  was  not  scheduled  to  end  until 
September 23, 2013, he was released from active duty (RELAD) on July 23, 2009.  His DD 214 
states  that  he  was  being  discharged  for  miscellaneous/general  reasons  and  sold  22.5  days  of 
leave.3  On July 24, 2009, he signed a two-year reenlistment contract, through July 23, 2011, to 
attend NMMI.   
 
 
The  applicant  attended  xxxxxxxxx  until  June  2010,  and  was  discharged  from  the  Coast 
Guard on June 27, 2010.  His DD 214 states that he was discharged for “enrollment in  service 
academy” and sold  28.5 days of leave.  On June 28, 2010, the applicant  took an oath  of office 
and entered the Coast Guard Academy as a fourth class cadet. 
 
 
On February 13, 2012, the applicant was disenrolled from the Coast Guard Academy for 
substandard performance and issued a DD 214 showing that he had completed 1 year, 7 months, 
and 16 days of active duty at the Academy4  and sold 51 days of accrued leave.5 On February 14, 
2012, a chief warrant officer at the Academy had him sign a 1-year, 29-week reenlistment con-
tract.  The Coast Guard’s Direct Access database states that the applicant’s reenlistment contract, 
“since he has been reverted from Cadet status back to his 6 year original contract, will be for a 
period  of  1  year  and  29  weeks  ending  on  09/23/2013.”    His  “Contract  Expected  End  Date”  in 
Direct Access is September 23, 2013.  Thereafter, the applicant was transferred to xxxxxxx as a 
seaman.6   
                                                 
2 Article 12.B.12.a. of the Personnel Manual in effect in 2009 states that enlisted members may be separated for the 
convenience of the Government for acceptance into a program leading to an active duty commission or appointment 
in any branch of the Armed Forces. 
3 Under Article 7.A.11.a. of the Personnel Manual, members earn 2.5 days of leave per month of continuous active 
duty.  Under Chapter 10.A.1. of the Pay Manual, each member may sell a maximum of 60 days of accrued, unused 
leave during his military career.  Leave may be sold on any date the member is being released or discharged from 
active duty.  Members may not carry more than 75 days of accrued leave from one fiscal year to the next, and any 
accrued leave in excess of 75 days is lost at the  start of a  new  fiscal  year. Personnel and Pay Procedures Manual, 
PPCINST  M1000.2A,  Chapter  5.D.2.1.    Chapter  1.E.  of  the  manual  for  preparing  DD  214s,  COMDTINST 
M1900.4D, states that block 16 of a DD 214 should contain “the number of days [of  accrued leave] for which the 
member was paid. If no lump-sum payment is made, the PERSRU will enter ‘None.’”  Chapter 1.D.2.a. states that 
“[a]ll entries [on a DD 214], unless specified otherwise (i.e., blocks 7a, 7b), are for the current period of active duty 
only  from  date  of  entry  as  shown  in  block  12a  through  the  date  of  separation  as  shown  in  block  12b.  (Note 
exception, block 13).” 
4 Under 10 U.S.C. § 101(d)(1), “active duty” is defined as “full-time duty in the active military service of the United 
States. Such term includes full-time training duty, annual training duty, and attendance, while in the active military 
service, at a school designated as a service school by law or by the Secretary of the military department concerned.” 
5 Under Chapters 10.A.1. and 10.A.3.d. of the Pay Manual, COMDTINST 7220.29B, Coast Guard Academy cadets 
may  not  sell  leave  when  they  are  discharged  and  no  member  may  sell  more  than  60  days  during  his  career.  
However,  51  is  the  total  of  the  days  of  leave  sold  on  the  applicant’s  prior  two  DD  214s,  so  it  appears  to  be  a 
cumulative entry. 
6 Under 14 U.S.C. § 182(b) and (c)(1), a cadet who does not complete the course of instruction at the Coast Guard 
Academy may be transferred to the Reserve and “order[ed] to active duty for such period of time as the Secretary 
prescribes (but not to exceed four years).” 

 

 

 

 
 

Summary of Past Actions 

Month 
Sept. 2007 
July 2009 
June 2010 
Feb. 2012 

Action 
Enlisted for 6 years of active duty 
Discharged (DD 214) and reenlisted for 2 years 
Discharged (DD 214) and appointed a cadet 
Disenrolled, discharged (DD 214), and 
reenlisted through September 23, 2013 

Reported Purpose for Action 
 
To enter the Scholar Program at xxxxxxxxxxx 
To enroll in the Coast Guard Academy 
To complete his prior original 6-year active 
duty obligation 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

On September 26, 2012, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submit-
ted  an  advisory  opinion  recommending  that  the  Board  grant  the  applicant’s  request.        In  so 
doing, he adopted the findings and analysis provided in a memorandum on the case prepared by 
the Personnel Service Center (PSC).   

 
PSC stated that that the applicant should not have been discharged and reenlisted in July 
2009  upon  entering  the  Scholar  Program.    PSC  also  alleged  that  he  should  not  have  been  dis-
charged on June 27, 2010, before entering the Academy.  PSC stated that for an enlisted member, 
“[a]ll  time  served  at  the  CG  Scholar  Program  and  the  Academy  counted  as  creditable  Active 
Duty service towards his original enlistment contract.”   Therefore, PSC recommended removing 
the following documents from the applicant’s military record: 

 

▪ 
▪ 
▪ 

July 23, 2009, DD 214 
July 24, 2009, two-year reenlistment contract 
June 27, 2010, DD 214  

 
 
PSC  did  not  address  the  applicant’s  DD  214  documenting  his  disenrollment  from  the 
Academy  or  his  reenlistment  contract  with  a  term  of  01  year,  29  weeks.    (The  Board  received 
copies  of  these  two  documents  from  the  applicant’s  unit,  and  Coast  Guard  Headquarters  may 
have been unaware of them when the advisory opinion was prepared.) 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On October 12, 2012,  the  BCMR sent  the applicant  a copy of the Coast  Guard’s views 

 
 
and invited him to respond within 30 days.  The BCMR did not receive a response.   
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

 COMDTINST 5354.2, Coast Guard Academy Scholar Program Administration  
 
 
Paragraph 4.a. states that  “cadet  candidates”  study  for ten months at  a military prepara-
tory school and, if they meet certain eligibility criteria, receive appointments to the Coast Guard 
Academy in accordance with Article 1.E. of the Personnel Manual. 
 

Paragraph  5.b.  states  that  a  civilian  entering  the  Scholar  Program  must  be  enlisted  on 
active duty.  Paragraph 5.d. states that reservists entering the program must be discharged from 

 

 

their Reserve obligation and enlisted on active duty.  Paragraph 5.j. states that for enlisted mem-
bers  entering  the  Scholar  Program,  PSC  issues  temporary  duty  orders  to  leave  their  assigned 
units and attend the program.    Paragraph 5.h. states that enlisted  members entering the Scholar 
Program  must  have  sufficient  obligated  service  to  complete  the  program  before  leaving  their 
prior units but does not state that they must be discharged and reenlisted. 
 

Paragraph 5.o. states that  cadet  candidates who  complete the  Scholar Program  and earn 
an appointment to the Coast Guard Academy will be issued permanent transfer orders to attend 
the Academy, which “will discharge members at the convenience of the government and matri-
culate them into the Coast Guard Academy as cadets.” 
 
 
Paragraph  5.h.  states  that  enlisted  members  must  sign  the  Statement  of  Understanding 
provided in Enclosure (1) before beginning the Scholar Program.  Paragraph 3 of Enclosure (1) 
states that if a prior enlisted member is disenrolled from the Coast Guard Academy, the member 
“will return to active duty to complete the remainder of service obligated under my enlisted con-
tract, calculated from the time I detached my prior unit to report for duty under instruction.” 
 
 
Paragraph 7.b.(11) states that before appointing a cadet candidate as a Coast Guard Acad-
emy  cadet,  the  Superintendent  of  the  Academy  must  ensure  that  the  cadet  candidate  signs  the 
Page  7  (CG-3307)  provided  in  Enclosure  (2).    Enclosure  (2)  states  in  pertinent  part,  “If  I  am 
appointed  to  cadet  status  from  prior  enlisted  service  status  and  disenrolled  from  the  Academy 
prior to graduation, my cadet service is creditable for longevity for pay purposes and retirement 
if I return to enlisted status [unless later appointed to commissioned or warrant officer status].” 
 
COMDTINST M1000.3, Officer Accessions, Evaluations, and Promotions 
 
 
Article  1.E.4.i.1.b.  of  this  manual  states  that  fourth  or  third  class  cadets  who  are  disen-
rolled from the Coast Guard Academy and “who entered the Academy as a member of the Coast 
Guard  or  Coast  Guard  Reserve  will  revert  to  their  prior  status  and  complete  the  remainder  of 
their duty obligation.  All time served in a cadet status is counted as service under any preexist-
ing enlistment or service obligation.”  
 
PPCINST M1000.2A, Personnel and Pay Procedures Manual 
 
 
enlisted to cadet status: 
 

Chapter  3.B.  of  this  manual  states  the  following  regarding  processing  a  member  from 

When transferring an enlisted member to the Academy for appointment as a Cadet, the member’s 
SPO [servicing personnel officer] shall: 
• Prepare and transmit the Statement of Intent transaction and verify/enter mailing address infor-
mation in Direct Access at least 45 days prior to the Cadet swearing-in date. 
• Approve and endorse the member’s PCS orders in Direct Access. 
•  The  Academy  SPO  will  input  a  Direct  Access  Discharge  transaction  to  discharge  the  member 
from enlisted status, and submit an Accession transaction to enlist the member as a cadet. 

 

 

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 submission and applicable law: 

 

 

 
1. 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant  to  10 U.S.C.  § 1552.  

The application was timely. 

 
2. 

The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he had no break 
in  service  between  his  September  24,  2007,  6-year  enlistment  and  June  27,  2010,  discharge  to 
enter the Academy.  He alleged that he was erroneously discharged and reenlisted in July 2009 
before starting the Coast Guard’s Scholar Program, and he asked the Board to expunge his July 
2009 DD 214 documenting the discharge and the 2-year reenlistment contract.  The applicant’s 
separation on July 23, 2009, and immediate reenlistment on July 24, 2009, did not actually con-
stitute a break in  service.7  However, the Coast  Guard recommended granting relief, and under 
the  regulations,  the  discharge  and  reenlistment  in  July  2009  were  unauthorized  because  the 
applicant had ample obligated service to complete the Scholar Program, as required by paragraph 
5.h. of COMDTINST 5354.2.  Article 12.B.12.a.2. of the Personnel Manual states that members 
may be discharged for acceptance into a program leading to an active duty commission—as the 
applicant was when he entered the Academy.  But the Scholar Program does not lead directly to 
an active duty commission; it leads to potential admission into the Academy.  And unlike Acad-
emy  cadets,  cadet  candidates in  the Scholar Program  are supposed to  be regular  enlisted mem-
bers, so there is no reason to discharge them from an enlistment that is already long enough to 
fulfill the requirements of paragraph 5.h. of COMDTINST 5354.2.  Finally, the Board notes that, 
while members may be discharged early if they are to be immediately reenlisted, the reenlistment 
must be for a period longer than the existing obligation,8 which was not what  happened in  this 
instance since the applicant’s remaining service obligation was reduced from more than 4 years 
to 2 years.  Therefore, the Board agrees with the Coast Guard that the applicant’s July 2009 dis-
charge and 2-year reenlistment contract should be removed from his record as null and void. 

 
3. 

The Coast Guard argued that the applicant’s discharge and DD 214 dated June 27, 
2010, should be removed from his record so that his original 6-year enlistment would still be in 
effect  when  he  was  disenrolled  from  the  Academy.    Article  1.E.4.i.1.b.  of  COMDTINST 
M1000.3 states that when a third class cadet with prior enlisted service is disenrolled, the cadet 
reverts to his enlisted status and “[a]ll time served in a cadet status is counted as service under 
any  preexisting  enlistment  or  service  obligation.”    However,  paragraph  5.o.  of  COMDTINST 
5354.2  and  Chapter  3.B.  of  the  Personnel  and  Pay  Procedures  Manual  require  and  Article 
12.B.12.a.2.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  authorizes  enlisted  members  to  be  discharged  from  their 
preexisting enlistments  before being  appointed cadets.   To the Board’s knowledge, none of the 
Coast Guard’s policies and regulations spell out exactly how the reversion to enlisted status and 
attribution  of  time  at  the  Academy  to  the  prior  enlistment  prescribed  by  Article  1.E.4.i.1.b.  of 
COMDTINST M1000.3 is supposed to happen.  Academy personnel presumably make this hap-
pen whenever a prior enlisted member is  disenrolled from  the Academy, and in  the applicant’s 
case,  they  discharged  him,  prepared  a  DD  214  to  document  his  time  at  the  Academy  as  active 
duty service, and reenlisted him through September 23, 2013, which would have been the end of 
his original, 6-year enlistment had he not been discharged to enter the Academy.  These actions 

                                                 
7  “For  regular  reenlistments,  a  member  must  reenlist  within  three  months  from  discharge  date  to  remain  in  a 
continuous service status.”  Personnel Manual, Article 1.G.8.a.  “If accomplished within 24 hours after discharge at 
the unit from which discharged, reenlistment is a continuation of the member's status.”  Personnel Manual, Article 
1.G.13.a. 
8 Personnel Manual, Article 12.B.12.a.4.   

 

 

taken  by  Academy  personnel  are  presumptively  correct,9  and  they  achieved  the  goal  of  Article 
1.E.4.i.1.b. by documenting the applicant’s time at the Academy as active duty service and obli-
gating him to serve out the same term of service he originally obligated himself to serve.  More-
over, removing the DD 214 dated June 27, 2010, from the applicant’s record would make the DD 
214 documenting the applicant’s disenrollment from the Academy for substandard performance 
in February 2012 the only DD 214 in his record, which is unjust given that the applicant would 
not  have  been  accepted  into  the  Scholar  Program  or  the  Academy  had  his  performance  as  an 
enlisted member been poor.  Therefore, the Board finds that it would be both erroneous and con-
trary to  the interest  of justice to  remove the DD 214 dated June 27, 2010, from  the applicant’s 
record because the applicant was properly discharged on that date to be enrolled in the Academy. 

 
4. 

Because  the  DD  214  documenting  the  applicant’s  service  from  September  24, 
2007, through July 23, 2009, is being removed from his record, the DD 214 dated June 27, 2010, 
must  be  revised  to  include  those  22  months  of  service.    Specifically,  the  following  corrections 
should be made so that the DD 214 will accurately document all of the applicant’s service from 
September 24, 2007, through June 27, 2010: 
 

  The place of entry into active duty in  block 7.a. should be corrected to  “Gunter Annex, 

AL,” where the applicant originally enlisted. 

  The  date  of  entry  on  active  duty  in  block  12.a.  should  be  corrected  to  September  24, 

2007. 

  The  net  active  service  this  period  in  block  12.c.  should  be  corrected  to  02  years,  09 

months, and 04 days. 

  The total prior active service in block 12.d. should be corrected to 00 years, 00 months, 

and 00 days. 

  The remarks in block 18 should be corrected to include the remarks required by the man-
ual for preparing DD 214s, COMDTINST M1900.4D, such as MGIB information and the 
applicant’s home of record.  
 
5. 

Block 16 of the applicant’s three DD 214s shows that he sold 22.5 days of leave 
when  he  was  discharged  in  2009,  28.5  days  of  leave  when  he  was  discharged  in  2010,  and  51 
days—the sum of 22.5 and 28.5—when he was discharged from the Academy.  However, under 
Chapters  1.D.2.a.  and  1.E.  of  COMDTINST  M1900.4D,  the  entry  in  block  16  should  not  be 
cumulative and should reflect only the amount of leave sold on the date of the discharge docu-
mented by the DD 214.10   The number in block 16 on the applicant’s February 2012 DD 214 is 
clearly  cumulative  because  it  is  the  sum  of  the  leave  sold  shown  on  his  two  prior  DD  214s,  it 
would otherwise raise his total days of leave sold above the maximum of 60,11 and cadets may 

                                                 
9 33 C.F.R. § 52.24(b); Arens v. United States, 969 F.2d 1034, 1037 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Sanders v. United States, 594 
F.2d 804, 813 (Ct. Cl. 1979) (noting that absent evidence to the contrary, Government officials are presumed to have 
carried out their duties “correctly, lawfully, and in good faith.” 
10 COMDTINST M1900.4D, states that block 16 of a DD 214 should contain “the number of days [of accrued leave] 
for which the member was paid. If no lump-sum payment is made, the PERSRU will enter ‘None.’” Chapter 1.D.2.a. 
states that “[a]ll entries [on a DD 214], unless specified otherwise (i.e., blocks 7a, 7b), are for the current period of 
active  duty  only  from  date  of  entry  as  shown  in  block  12a  through  the  date  of  separation  as  shown  in  block  12b. 
(Note exception, block 13).” 
11 Pay Manual, Chap. 10.A.1.a. 

 

 

not sell leave when they are discharged.12  If the applicant had not been erroneously discharged 
in 2009, he would not have been allowed to sell 22.5 days of leave at that time, but he could have 
sold it when he was discharged in June 2010, instead.13  Therefore, the Board finds that the 22.5 
days of leave that the applicant sold in July 2009 should be attached to his discharge on June 27, 
2010,  and  the  number  in  block  16  of  that  DD  214  should  be  corrected  to  show  the  sum  of  all 
days of leave for which he was paid pursuant to his discharges in July 2009 and June 2010 (51 
days).  Finally, the Coast Guard should correct block 16 of the applicant’s DD 214 dated Febru-
ary 13, 2012, to show zero because, under COMDTINST M1900.4D, block 16 is not supposed to 
reflect cumulative days of leave sold. 

 
6. 

Pursuant to these corrections, the applicant’s record will show that he enlisted for 
6  years  of  active  duty  on  September  24,  2007;  was  discharged  to  be  appointed  a  cadet  at  the 
Academy and sold leave 51 days of leave on June 27, 2010; was discharged from the Academy 
on February 13, 2012, and sold no days of leave; and reenlisted on February 14, 2012, through 
September  23,  2013,  to  complete  his  original  service  obligation  in  accordance  with  paragraph 
5.h.  of  COMDTINST  5354.2  and  Article  1.E.4.i.1.b.  of  COMDTINST  M1000.3.    The  Board 
notes that if the applicant ever accepts an appointment as a chief warrant officer or a commission 
as an officer, his time at the Academy will no longer count as active duty time.14 
 

7. 

Accordingly, relief should be granted.  The applicant’s military record should be 
corrected  by  expunging  his  July  23,  2009,  DD  214  and  his  July  24,  2009,  2-year  reenlistment 
contract  as  null  and  void;  changing  the  entries  on  his  June  27,  2010,  DD  214  as  explained  in 
findings 4 and 5 above; and by changing block 16 of his February 13, 2012, DD 214 to show that 
he sold zero days of leave. 

    

  

 
 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

                                                 
12 Pay Manual, Chap. 10.A.3.d. 
13 The Board notes that under Chapter 5.D.2.l. of PPCINST M1000.2A, members may not carry over more than 75 
days of accrued leave from one fiscal year to the next, but because members accrue leave at a rate of 2.5 days per 
month  and  at  the  end  of  fiscal  year  2009,  the  applicant  had  served  on  active  duty  for  only  24  months,  it  is  not 
possible that he had accrued enough leave by October 1, 2009, to lose any leave, and so the accrued leave he sold in 
July 2009 would still have been available for him to sell when he was discharged in June 2010. 
14  10  U.S.C.  §  971(b)(3)  (prohibiting  time  spent  as  an  Academy  cadet  from  being  included  when  computing  the 
length of service of a Coast Guard officer for any purpose, such as pay or retirement). 

 

 

ORDER 

 
 
record is granted.  The Coast Guard shall 

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

1.    remove  from  his  record  as  null  and  void  his  July  23,  2009,  discharge  and  DD  214  and  his  
2-year reenlistment contract dated July 24, 2009, and change the date of his sale of leave to 
his discharge on June 27, 2010;  

2.  correct block 16 of his DD 214 dated February 13, 2012, to show that he sold zero days of 

leave at that time; and 

3.  correct his DD 214 dated June 27, 2010, as follows:  

a.  The place of entry on active duty in block 7.a. shall be corrected to Gunter Annex, AL.  
b.  The date of entry on active duty in block 12.a. shall be corrected to September 24, 2007. 
c.  The net active service this period in block 12.c. shall be corrected to 02 years, 09 months, 

and 04 days. 

d.  The total prior active service in block 12.d. shall be corrected to 00 years, 00 months, and 

00 days. 

e.  The days of accrued leave paid in block 16 shall be corrected to 51. 
f.  The  remarks  in  block  18  shall  be  corrected  to  include  the  remarks  required  by  Chapter 

1.E. of COMDTINST M1900.4D, such as MGIB information and his home of record.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 Troy D. Byers 

 
The Coast Guard shall also pay him any amount due as a result of these corrections. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 Frank E. Howard 
  

 

 
 
 Lillian Cheng