DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket No. 2011-043
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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 December 8, 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 July 14, 2011, is approved and signed by the three duly
APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he retired from the Coast
Guard Reserve as an E-8 on March 31, 1996. He alleged that although he served in the Coast
Guard Reserve as an E-5, he attained the rank of E-8 while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps
Reserve from 1969 to 1983. Therefore, he argued, he should be retired at that pay grade. The
applicant stated that he learned of this error on or about July 17, 2010, which was his 60th
birthday and the day he became eligible for Reserve retirement pay.
In support of these allegations, the applicant submitted (a) a “Reserve Retirement Master
Control Card (1820),” prepared by the Separation and Retirement Branch of the Navy Bureau of
Personnel on May 3, 2010, which shows that he served in the USMC Reserve from March 4,
1969, to August 7, 1983, when he was honorably discharged in pay grade E-8, and (b) a State-
ment of Creditable Service from the Coast Guard, which shows that he was in pay grade E-5.
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On March 30, 2011, the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard submitted an
advisory opinion in which he recommended that the Board grant relief. In making this recom-
mendation, he adopted the findings and analysis provided in a memorandum on the case pre-
pared by the Personnel Service Center (PSC), which stated that the Board should grant relief
because the applicant was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve as an E-8, and
retired members who began military service before September 8, 1980, should receive retired
pay “based on the highest grade satisfactorily held at any time in the Armed Forces and the
Commandant’s determination that the member’s performance in that grade was satisfactory.”
The PSC noted that granting relief in this case would be consistent with the Board’s
decision in BCMR Docket No. 2007-175, in which the Board ordered the Coast Guard to correct
the applicant’s record “to show that he is entitled to retired pay computed based upon pay grade
E-5, the highest grade he held satisfactorily in the National Guard. The applicant shall receive
back pay and allowances retroactive to the date on which his retired pay began.” The Board
found in that case that although the applicant was properly retired from the Coast Guard as an E-
4, and so his identification card and other documents should show his rate as E-4, under 10
U.S.C. § 1406(b)(2)1 and Article 8.C.8. of the Reserve Policy Manual,2 his retired pay had to be
based upon his highest grade satisfactorily held in the Armed Forces at any time, which was E-5.
APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On April 6, 2011, the Chair sent the applicant a copy of the views of the Coast Guard and
invited him to submit a response within thirty days. No response was received.
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:
1.
The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.
The application is timely.
2.
Because the applicant entered military service before September 8, 1980, he is
entitled to receive Reserve retired pay based on the highest pay grade he satisfactorily held at any
time in his military career.3 He alleged that the highest pay grade he satisfactorily held was E-8,
even though he was an E-5 when he retired from the Coast Guard, and he submitted evidence
showing that he was an E-8 when he was honorably discharged from the Marine Corps Reserve
in 1983. The Coast Guard has conceded that the highest grade he satisfactorily held in the
military was E-8. Therefore, the Board finds that the applicant has proved by a preponderance of
the evidence that the highest grade he satisfactorily held in the military was E-8, and his retired
pay should be based on the monthly basic pay of an E-8 even though he retired as an E-5.
3.
Accordingly, relief should be granted by correcting the applicant’s record to show
that the highest grade he satisfactorily held, for the purpose of calculating his retired pay, is E-8.
1 10 U.S.C. § 1406(b)(2) (“Retired pay base for members who first became members before September 8, 1980:
final basic pay, …Non-regular service retirement. In the case of a person who is entitled to retired pay under section
12731 of this title, the retired pay base is the monthly basic pay, determined at the rates applicable on the date when
retired pay is granted (or, …), of the highest grade held satisfactorily by the person at any time in the armed forces.”
2 Article 8.C.8. of the Reserve Policy Manual states that, for members with dates of initial entry into military service
prior to 8 September 1980, retired pay is computed based on the highest grade satisfactorily held at any time in the
Armed Forces and the Commandant’s determination that the member’s performance in that grade was satisfactory.
3 See footnote 1, above.
The application of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCGR (Retired), for
correction of his military record is granted as follows:
ORDER
Troy D. Byers
The Coast Guard shall correct his record to show that he is entitled to retired pay based
upon pay grade E-8, the highest grade he held satisfactorily in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve.
He shall receive back pay and allowances retroactive to the date on which his retired pay began.
Francis H. Esposito
Dana Ledger
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2008-129
On May 1, 2002, the applicant was transferred to the Coast Guard Reserve Retired list without pay (RET-2). Coast Guard Reserve Policy Manual Article 8.C.8.b of the Reserve Policy Manual states that retired pay for members with dates of initial entry into military service (DIEMS) prior to 8 September 1980 is computed based on the highest grade satisfactorily held at any time in the Armed Forces and the Commandant’s determination that the member’s performance in that grade was satisfactory. ...
CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 2007-175
This final decision, dated April 30, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record to show that he retired in pay grade E-5, which is the highest grade that he held in the Louisiana Army National Guard, rather than PS3 (pay grade E-4), which is the highest grade he held within the Coast Guard. The Commanding Officer, Coast Guard Human Resources Service & Information Center (HRSIC) informed the applicant that...
CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 2010-119
The applicant stated that he completed his SELRES service on his 60th birthday, March 13, 2007, and entered retired status RET-1 on that date with 40 years, 10 months, and 3 days of creditable service time and 4,491 retirement points. In Public Law 109-364, Congress authorized new pay rates to go into effect on April 1, 2007, and extended them from the previously highest category, “over 26,” to a new high for “over 40.” Although the applicant considers his situation to be one of a kind...
CG | BCMR | Retirement Cases | 2010-238
The PSC stated that the application is untimely and should be denied on that basis Regarding the merits of the application, the PSC stated that under Article 5.C.33.b. of the Personnel Manual, after a member’s rate has been reduced at mast, the member is “subject to the normal advancement system, unless they are considered by their commanding officers to be deserving of special advancement.” The PSC stated that there is no evidence in the record that the applicant successfully competed for...
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2011-068
This final decision, dated September 29, 2011, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, former lieutenant (LT) who was honorably discharged from the Reserve on June 30, 1994, asked the Board to correct his military record to show that he has service- connected amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS; also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease) and is entitled to processing under the Physical Disability Evaluation System (PDES) and to disability retired...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2012-115
The applicant stated that he was eligible for advancement under Article 1.C.12.f. On February 21, 1995, the Military Personnel Command issued the applicant physical disability retirement orders, which state that the applicant would be retired with a 100% disability rating as of March 21, 1995. Moreover, the JAG argued, even if the Board finds that it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations in this case, the Board should deny relief because the applicant has failed...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2012-115
The applicant stated that he was eligible for advancement under Article 1.C.12.f. On February 21, 1995, the Military Personnel Command issued the applicant physical disability retirement orders, which state that the applicant would be retired with a 100% disability rating as of March 21, 1995. Moreover, the JAG argued, even if the Board finds that it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations in this case, the Board should deny relief because the applicant has failed...
CG | BCMR | Medals and Awards | 2011-012
In this regard, the PSC noted that the criteria for a Sea Service ribbon include 12 months of sea duty, which the applicant did not have, and that the list of units authorized to wear the Arctic Service medal does not include any unit to which the applicant was assigned for the period the medal was authorized. of the Medals and Awards Manual states that the Sea Service Ribbon was authorized on March 3, 1984, and is “[a]warded to active and inactive duty members of the Coast Guard and Coast...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2011-181
This final decision, dated February 23, 2012, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he enlisted as a third class petty officer (pay grade E-4), rather than a seaman (pay grade E-3). The revision of the policy for the RQ program announced in the memorandum dated February 3, 2010, expanded the program “to allow for DoD personnel with greater than 8 years of honorable service to enter the...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2012-094
This final decision, dated December 7, 2012, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a Reserve lieutenant commander (LCDR) serving on active duty, asked the Board to correct her record to show that her LT date of rank is July 3, 2005, instead of July 30, 2005, and to show that she was promoted to LCDR on March 1, 2012, instead of May 1, 2012. (4)(a) of COMDTINST M1000.3, all officers must serve a minimum of 30 months in the grade of...