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. It was com-
menced upon the BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s request on September 1,
1998.
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
This final decision, dated May 6, 1999, is signed by the three duly
RELIEF REQUESTED
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket No. 1998-111
The applicant, a former xxxxxxxxxxx in the Coast Guard, now serves in
the Coast Guard Reserve. He asked the Board to change his date of discharge
from active duty from April 1, 198x, to April 3, 198x, so that he would not have to
perform an extra year of drilling to qualify for a 20-year retirement.
APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS
The applicant alleged that he was discharged on April 1, 198x, rather than
April 3, 198x, because April 3rd fell on a Sunday. If he had been discharged on
April 3rd, he would have completed 10 full years on active duty. Instead, he
completed only 9 years, 11 months, and 29 days on active duty.
The applicant alleged that he expected to qualify for a 20-year retirement
in April 199x. However, he received no papers regarding his retirement. Upon
inquiry, he was told that he would have to complete an extra year of drilling
because he had missed completing 10 years on active duty by just one day. The
applicant alleged that this was unjust because he had been specifically advised to
be discharged on April 1st so that he could enter the Reserves the same day and
his record would show no break in service. Moreover, his assigned drilling sta-
tion in xxxxxx, is more than 100 miles from his home in xxxxxxxxx.
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On April 13, 1999, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended
that the Board deny the applicant’s request. The Chief Counsel attached to his
advisory opinion a memorandum from the Coast Guard Personnel Command
(CGPC). CGPC explained the following with regard to members whose end of
service falls on a weekend or holiday:
It is Coast Guard policy to release a member early on Friday so they can reach a
recruiter within 24 hours if they change their mind and decide to re-enlist. Once
they are released early, there is no credit given for the Saturday, Sunday, or
Holiday that they do not serve. Members are commonly released two days early,
vice being extended one day.
CGPC stated that the “applicant has made arrangements to drill in April
199x so that he obtains one day towards retirement and thus becomes eligible for
a 20-year Coast Guard Reserve Retirement.”
On April 14, 1999, the Chairman sent the applicant a copy of the views of
the Coast Guard and invited him to respond within 15 days. The applicant did
not respond.
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
On April 3, 197x, the applicant originally enlisted in the Coast Guard for a
term of 4 years. He subsequently extended this enlistment three times,
obligating himself to serve another 6 years, through Saturday, April 2, 198x. On
Friday, April 1, 198x, the applicant was discharged after having served 9 years,
11 months, and 29 days on active duty. On Saturday, April 2, 198x, the applicant
joined the Reserve, where he continues to serve.
APPLICABLE LAWS
Article 12-B-11.a. of the Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6), in
effect in 198x, states that “[u]nless voluntarily or involuntarily retained beyond
normal date of expiration of enlistment as provided in this article or by other
instructions issued by the Commandant, a member shall be discharged, or
released from active duty and transferred to the Reserve to fulfill any remaining
service obligation, on the day next preceding the applicable anniversary date of
enlistment. See article 12-B-7 for conditions allowing early separation . . . .”
Article 12-B-7.a. states that “[e]arly separation under the provisions of this
article does not deprive a member of any right, privilege, or benefit otherwise
entitled to, except the pay, allowances, and credit for service for unexpired
period not served.”
Article 12-B-7.c. states that “[p]ersonnel not eligible for early separation
under paragraph b. hereof whose normal date of expiration of enlistment, exten-
sions of enlistment or period of active duty falls on a Friday, Saturday, Sunday,
or holiday shall be separated not more than 7 days prior to normal date of sepa-
ration.”
Article 1-G-8 states that “[a] person reenlisting within 24 hours after dis-
charge may be reenlisted at the unit to which last regularly assigned. All other
reenlistments shall be effected only at a regular recruiting officer.”
Article 1-G-6 states that “[a] person must reenlist within 3 months from
date of discharge in order to remain in a continuous service status and to receive
the benefits derived therefrom.”
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1.
2.
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 sec-
tion 1552 of title 10 of the United States Code. The application was timely.
The applicant was discharged on Friday, April 1, 198x, one day
short of his expiration of enlistment on Saturday, April 2, 198x. He had served
9 years, 11 months, and 29 days on active duty. Under Article 12-B-7.a., he
received no credit for the missing day. He therefore had to complete 11 years of
drilling in the Reserve, rather than 10 years, to qualify for a 20-year retirement.
Under Article 12-B-7.c., commanding officers were permitted to
discharge members up to seven days early if their normal expiration of enlist-
ment fell on a weekend, Friday, or holiday. The Coast Guard alleged that this
provision was often used to discharge members on a weekday so that if they
changed their minds within 24 hours they could reenlist in the regular Coast
Guard with no break in service shown. The applicant apparently received and
3.
4.
5.
The Coast Guard did not commit error in applying its regulations
with respect to the applicant’s discharge. The Coast Guard could rewrite its
regulations to avoid the problems presented by expirations of enlistments that
fall on weekends without requiring such members to perform an extra year of
drilling to make up for one or two days of active duty service. However, because
the applicant apparently chose to be discharged one day early, perhaps on the
basis on misunderstood advice, the Board does not find that the result of the
regulations as applied in this case was unconscionably or clearly unjust. Further-
more, because the applicant apparently has already performed sufficient drilling
to qualify for a 20-year retirement, this issue is moot.
Accordingly, because the Coast Guard’s actions were not clearly
unjust and the applicant has already qualified for a 20-year retirement, his
request should be denied.
accepted this advice but did not understand the advice or the effect of being dis-
charged one day early on his retirement.
[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE NEXT PAGE]
The application for correction of the military record of former XXXXXXX,
ORDER
_______________________________
Mark A. Holmstrup
_______________________________
Walter K. Myers
_______________________________
Pamela M. Pelcovits
USCG, is hereby denied.
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 | 2003-109
He determined the applicant's death to be "line of duty" but that she was not in a duty status at the time of her death. The applicant was a reservist who performed monthly weekend drills (inactive duty training (IDT)) with a PSU (port security unit). The LCDR from the applicant's unit never stated that the applicant was in a duty status after the drill had secured.
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2001-091
The applicant stated that a Naval psychiatrist, who evaluated him in 199X at the request of the Coast Guard, supports his allegation that his Bipolar disease was incurred on and aggravated by his Coast Guard active duty service. He stated that the applicant needed to be "medically boarded from the Coast Guard" and recommended a medical board, which should have occurred while the applicant was on active duty. In recent statements on behalf of the applicant, CDR H (the flight surgeon), as...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 1998-099
The applicant alleged that he did not have a personality disorder. On December 7, 199x, after reviewing the report of the ADB and the record, the Commander of the xxxx Coast Guard District recommended to the Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) that the applicant be discharged for misconduct. No member of the Coast Guard has a right to a TERA retirement.
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 1999-074
CGPC stated that the applicant’s original enlistment date in the Coast Guard was indeed November 20, 198x. On November 20, 198x, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve On December 16, 198x, the Coast Guard sent the Air Force a “Request for Statement of Service,” form CG-4714, because the applicant had indicated in his enlistment documents that he had previously served in the Air Force. The application for correction of the military record of XXXXXXXXXXX, ORDER Mark A....
CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 1999-132
The Coast Guard alleged that many lieutenants serving on continuation contracts with less than 18 years of active service were denied TERA retirements and discharged with severance pay. In 199x, the Coast Guard incorrectly promised the applicant that, if he accepted a four-year active duty continuation contract, he would be able to remain on active duty until he could retire with 20 years of active service. However, the Coast Guard permitted the applicant to retire under TERA, which gave...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001056728C070420
As pertains to this case, for the period under review, 5 December 1963 through 3 December 1965, the applicant would be credited with 00 years, 11 months, and 29 days of qualifying service. The action to separate him one day (not two days) early from the active Army has worked to his detriment by denying him a qualifying year for non-regular retirement. c. showing that the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service on 4 December 1965, thus giving...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070007537
Powers Chairperson Mr. Edward E. Montgomery Member Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that on 17 May 1968, he was honorably released from active duty under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) at his ETS and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 1998-015
He stated that the applicant’s DD Form dated October 31, 199x, is correct, and that the applicant’s sea and foreign service were properly documented on his other DD Form 214s. Therefore, the applicant’s Coast Guard foreign/sea service should be reflected only on the DD Form 214 that covers the period during which he performed that service. Like- wise the foreign and/or sea service performed by the applicant for the Coast Guard in the 1970s properly appears only on the DD Form 214 dated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023448
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) to show his separation date as 19 November 1989. The applicants DD Form 4 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document) shows he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) on 31 August 1987 under the Delayed Entry Program and he enlisted in the Regular Army on 19 November 1987 for a period of 2 years, which established his expiration term of service (ETS) date as 18 November 1989. ...