Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2010-165
Original file (2010-165.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 

 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 

 
BCMR Docket No. 2010-165 

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 April  29,  2010,  and  assigned  it  to  staff  member  J.  Andrews  to  pre-
pare 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  February  4,  2011,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

 

 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

The  applicant  asked  the  Board  to  correct  his  official  home  of  record  (HOR)  from  an 
address  in  Elmhurst,  New  York,  zip  code  11373,  which  is  in  Queens,  New  York  City,  to  an 
address in Hamburg, New York, which is near Buffalo.  He stated that he would like his HOR 
changed “before my discharge on 6 MAY 2010 so that I may move my household to CT from 
Hamburg, NY.”  He alleged that his HOR is incorrectly shown in his record.   
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
On September 6, 2005, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard as a  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
in the rate of xxxxxxxxx.  His original enlistment contract, dated September 6, 2005, shows a 
street address in Elmhurst, New York, zip code 11373, as his home of record and that he was 
enlisted at a recruiting office in Queens.  On May 4, 2010, the applicant was discharged.  His DD 
214 shows that his HOR was in Elmhurst, NY, zip code 11373. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On September 1, 2010, the Judge Advocate General submitted an advisory opinion adopt-
ing the findings and analysis provided in a memorandum on the case prepared by the Personnel 
Service Center (PSC).  The PSC recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request.   
 

 
The PSC stated that the applicant reported his HOR as being in Elmhurst, NY, upon his 
enlistment and that under COMDTINST M1900.4D, a DD 214 is supposed to show, as the HOR, 
the “address if known where member originally entered active duty without a break in service.”  
Because the applicant’s DD 214 reflects the same place shown on his enlistment contract, the 
PSC argued, he has failed to substantiate any error in his record. 
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

The  Joint  Federal  Travel  Regulations  (JFTR),  Appendix  A,  Part  1,  define  the  HOR  as 

follows: 
 

 

 

 

1. 

 
2. 

 
3. 

 
4. 
 

HOME OF RECORD (HOR). The place recorded as the home of the individual when commis-
sioned, appointed, enlisted, inducted, or ordered into a tour of active duty. 
 
NOTE  1:  The  place  recorded  as  the  home  of  the  individual  when  reinstated,  reappointed,  or 
reenlisted remains the same as that recorded when commissioned, appointed, enlisted or inducted 
or ordered into the tour of active duty unless there is a break in service of more than one full day. 
Only if a break in service exceeds one full day may the member change the HOR. 
 
NOTE 2: Travel and transportation allowances are based on the officially corrected recording in 
those instances when, through a bona fide error, the place originally named at time of current entry 
into the Service was not in fact the actual home. Any such correction must be fully justified and 
the home, as corrected, must be the actual home of the member upon entering the Service, and not 
a different place selected for the member’s convenience. 

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 submissions, and applicable law: 
 

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

The application was timely. 

 The applicant alleged that his official HOR should be Hamburg, NY, rather than 
Elmhurst, NY, which is the HOR in his record.  The Board begins its analysis in every case by 
presuming that the disputed information in the applicant’s military record is correct as it appears 
in his record, and the applicant bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence 
that the disputed information is erroneous or unjust. 33 C.F.R. § 52.24(b).  Absent evidence to 
the contrary, the Board presumes that Coast Guard officials and other Government employees 
have carried out their duties “correctly, lawfully, and in good faith.” Arens v. United States, 969 
F.2d 1034, 1037 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Sanders v. United States, 594 F.2d 804, 813 (Ct. Cl. 1979). 

The applicant submitted no evidence whatsoever to support his allegation that his 
home at the time of his enlistment was Hamburg, NY.  Nothing in his military records supports 
his assertion.  Moreover, his enlistment at a recruiting office in Queens, NY, supports an HOR in 
Queens when he enlisted and not across the state near Buffalo. 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied. 

 

ORDER 

The  application  of  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 Philip B. Busch 

 

 

 

 
 
 Nancy L. Friedman 

 

 

 
 Lynda K. Pilgrim 

 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

military record is denied. 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015250

    Original file (20140015250.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his home of record (HOR) on his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) be changed to Alabama. The evidence of record confirms the applicant's HOR at the time of his enlistment in the RA was Buffalo, NY. The evidence of record verifies that his HOR was recorded as Buffalo, NY when he enlisted in the military in 1990 and at his reenlistment in 1994.

  • CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2008-142

    Original file (2008-142.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He stated that this was an error because Wrightwood, CA, is not his HOR, “but rather where [he] was living while stationed in the Air National Guard. CGPC stated that “[a]t the time of his original enlistment in the Coast Guard, he listed his residence as Wrightwood, CA 92397, and he was enlisted at Recruiting Office San Diego, CA.” CGPC stated that his “HOR for the Coast Guard is based upon his home at the time he enlisted in the Coast Guard.” When he enlisted in the Coast Guard, “he was...

  • CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2011-242

    Original file (2011-242.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated May 17, 2012, is signed by the three duly appointed members APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he will be reimbursed for the full cost of flying his two dependents from Xxxxxx to Hawaii, which was $2,460.46. PSC stated that the JFTR and the applicant’s travel orders required the applicant to purchase airfare on a GTR (Government Travel Request) account. PSC stated that the applicant is not entitled to...

  • CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2010-097

    Original file (2010-097.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The comment, which supports a low mark of 3 in the performance category “Responsibility,”1 states the following: “Had to be counseled on several occasions to comply w/ own dependent support memo.” The applicant alleged that the comment should be removed because it is prohibited under the Personnel Manual.2 VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD In response to the applicant’s request, the Officer Personnel Management branch of the Personnel Service Center (PSC) advised the applicant on May 28, 2010, that...

  • CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2009-082

    Original file (2009-082.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The disputed Page 7, which is signed by the applicant and by two lieu- tenants—LT O and LT R—from his Coast Guard and Navy chains of command, respectively, states the following: 01 OCT 07 You are being counseled concerning your responsibility to keep both chains of com- mand informed of your foreign travel and cautioned against attempting to undermine the authority of the two commands of which you are a part. He alleged that “this requirement was not looked upon seriously as I was of the...

  • CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2009-232

    Original file (2009-232.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The captain who served as the Sector Commander and reporting officer for the disputed OER stated that when the sector was stood up the applicant’s assigned position title was changed from the Chief of the Operations Prevention Department at MSO Xxxxxxxx to Chief of the Prevention Department for the sector. The PSC noted that the reporting officer stated that the applicant’s duties during the evaluation period “did not include the authorities and responsibilities inherent in Command.” The...

  • CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2009-185

    Original file (2009-185.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PSC stated that the fact that the State dismissed the charge against the applicant and expunged the arrest from his record does not negate the alcohol incident because the definition of the latter does not require any arrest or conviction. Statement of CDR E, Past CO of the MLEA incident, stated that CDR E, who was the applicant’s commanding officer at the time of the alleged alcohol while the State of xxxxxx order for destruction of arrest records is clearly in their purview,...

  • CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 2011-226

    Original file (2011-226.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. The veteran’s military records show that the veteran was born male and served in the Coast Guard with a male name.1 The applicant alleged that she is the veteran and that a State court has legally changed her name to the female name shown in the case caption. Furthermore, it should be noted that records of former service members are filed...

  • CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2012-113

    Original file (2012-113.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant alleged that he was diagnosed with epilepsy in December 2009, and that it was this diagnosis that caused his discharge. With full knowledge of the findings of the medical board convened in my case and of my rights in this matter, I hereby certify I do not demand a hearing before a physical evaluation board and request I be separated from the United States Coast Guard as soon as possible. Moreover, the applicant was not allowed to work near the water; the closest unit to his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008288

    Original file (20120008288.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * ALARACT Message 021/2008, dated 5 February 2008 * Orders 112-0439, issued by U.S. Army Installation Management Command, Headquarters, U.S. Army Garrison Command, Fort Knox, Fort Knox, KY, dated 22 April 2010 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), Request for Intra-Group Reassignment, dated 25 May 2010 * Lease Agreement, dated 1 June 2010 * Orders 06-023, issued by Headquarters, 3rd Special Forces Group (Airborne), Fort Bragg, NC, dated 23 June 2010 * Memorandum for...