[2ndreconmarine]

No, as a commissioned officer, he could leave active duty, never participate in guards or reserves, and still maintain his commission - meaning there would be no discharge.

I disagree just slightly. You are correct that an Officer can keep his commission after the end of active duty. However, there are limits. An officer has to do something to maintain the commission, at least in the naval services. He has to be either active, active reserve, or IRR (see my post #22). In the IRR, you are still supposed to go to meetings (you get credit for service and retirement points but are not paid). The most leeway they will give you is 5-6 years of doing nothing. Typically it is 5 years but you can get a 1 year extension for a good reason.

We know that Kerry was neither active or active reserve after 1972. We don't know that he wasn't IRR. We do know he didn't participate. So, he could have had a 6 year grace period from 1972 to 1978.

Look, I know it is unlikely, particularly because of all of the other evidence. However, it is simply not conclusive yet. Again, unfortunately.

[claudiustg]

---We know that Kerry was neither active or active reserve after 1972. We don't know that he wasn't IRR. We do know he didn't participate. So, he could have had a 6 year grace period from 1972 to 1978.---

I don't think there's a pot of gold here, just some technical BS. Sorry.

[bushisdamanin04]

You are probably right. I maintained my commission for several years after my committment was up and I did nothing after I left active duty save for one physical.

[edfrank_1998]

You said:

"We know that Kerry was neither active or active reserve after 1972. We don't know that he wasn't IRR. We do know he didn't participate. So, he could have had a 6 year grace period from 1972 to 1978.

Look, I know it is unlikely, particularly because of all of the other evidence. However, it is simply not conclusive yet. Again, unfortunately."

There's some conflict on whether he was active reserve or not if you read the items at his website. Note the differences on the 3 Jan 70 transfers to the Naval Reserve.

The first letter (from the Office of Legal Counsel, Naval Military Personnel Command) came shortly after he was sworn in the first time as a senator. Why that office, BTW?

found at: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Service_Record.pdf

This is the Enclosure (1) to some document that was dated January 25, 1985. It was written by LCDR D. W. Meyers, Office of Legal Counsel, Naval Military Personnel Command. It shows dates of different events.

Here's an excerpt from the .pdf file:

D.O.R as LT, USNR 1 January 1970
Release from ACDU/
Trf to Naval Reserve 3 January 1970
Trf to Standby Reserve - Inactive 1 July 1972
Discharged for U.S. Naval Reserve 16 February 1978

---

found at: http://www.johnkerry.com/pdf/jkmilservice/Request_For_History_of_Service.pdf

This is a letter dated 24 May 1986. This is almost a year and a half after the previous document.

Here's an excerpt of the .pdf file:

"Senator Kerry:

Your request of the 9th of May concerning documentation of your
Naval Service has been forwarded by the National Personnel
Records Center to this office for reply.

The follow (sic) statement of Naval Service accurately reflects the
documentation in your Naval Personnel Record:

..snip..

1 Jan 1970 Date of Rank as Lieutenant (O-3), United
States Naval Reserve

3 Jan 1970 Released from Active Duty, transferred to
the Naval Reserve (inactive)

1 Jul 1972 Transferred to the Standby Reserve (inactive)

16 Feb 1978 Honorably Discharged from the United States
Naval Reserve as a Lieutenant (O-3)

If additional copies of information is (sic) required from your
official Naval Records, please feel free to contact this office
or the National Personnel Records Center directly."

This letter is from the Naval Military Personnel Command Liaison Office of the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis.



The second letter is not signed by R. J. Schultz, LCDR who is apparently the author. That is extremely odd. Things get signatures in the military in order to become official.

The first was an enclosure to something. Was it a reply to a request from the Senator to document his naval service? If so, why from the Office of Legal Counsel of Naval Military Personnel Command? That's an odd place to get that sort of information. Did Kerry wait over a year before going fishing to get someone to write what he wanted?

We'll never see him sign an SF 180. There are too many oddities in what he has already released.

Semper Fi
USMC '69-'72
2571/2577/2578