DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of:
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
The Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant relief by allowing the applicant to reenlist for 6 years on November 13, 2009, to receive an SRB calculated with only 32 months of newly obligated service. The applicant agreed with the JAG’s recommendation.
To accept his transfer orders to ET “A” School on April 25, 2008, the applicant was required to have 3 years of obligated service upon graduating on December 11, 2008. Therefore, before accepting the orders, he needed to obligate service through December 10, 2011. Because his prior enlistment would end on March 20, 2010, he could have signed just a 21-month extension contract on April 25, 2008, to obligate service through December 20, 2011. Therefore, the advice he received to extend his enlistment for 33 months may have been erroneous.1
To receive his CSTB under ALCOAST 316/08, however, the applicant needed at least 4 years of obligated service upon his advancement to ET3/E-4 on January 23, 2009—i.e., service through at least January 23, 2013. Because his 33-month extension ran through December 20, 2011, he needed the 2-month extension through February 20, 2013, to receive the CSTB. If he had correctly signed a 21-month extension contract on April 25, 2008, obligating service through December 20, 2011, he would have been required to sign a 14-month extension contract on January 20, 2009, instead of just a 2-month contract, obligating service from December 21, 2011 through February 20, 2013, to receive the CSTB.
The applicant’s record currently shows two extensions—one for 33 months and the other for 2 months—extending his prior enlistment for a total of 35 months from March 21, 2010, through February 20, 2013. However, even if he had been advised to extend his enlistment for just 21 months on April 25, 2008, his record would still show two extensions totaling 35 months and obligating him through February 20, 2013, but the first extension would be for 21 months and the second would be for 14 months. Whether the 35 months from March 21, 2010, through February 20, 2013, are covered by extensions of 33 and 2 months or 21 and 14 months, the applicant still had to have the 35 months more months of obligated service to receive the CSTB.
Because his “C” School orders required obligated service only through July 1, 2012, and he already had obligated service through February 20, 2013, when he began “C” School, he did not need to obligate any additional service to attend “C” School. Likewise, when the applicant received orders in September 2009 to report to a new unit on December 14, 2009, which required 3 years of obligated service, he did not need to obligate any additional service because he had already obligated service through February 20, 2013. Therefore, he was not authorized to sign any contract for an SRB in the fall of 2009 because he was not within 3 months of his end of enlistment or his 6th or 10th active duty anniversary and he did not need to sign any contract to accept his transfer orders. See Personnel Manual, Articles 12.B.7., 3.C.5.9., and 1.G.15.a.
Although the applicant alleged that he wanted to reenlist for an SRB in the fall of 2009, he was not authorized to reenlist for an SRB under the Personnel Manual because he had enough obligated service in his record to accept his transfer orders. Nor is there any written promise of an SRB on any contract or Page 7 in his record. Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied.
The application of ET3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his military record is denied.
August 12, 2010
Date Thomas H. Van Horn
Darren S. Wall
George A. Weller
However, the Board notes that it is also possible that the 33-month extension was signed with the intention of qualifying the applicant for a CSTB by giving him four years of obligated service past his “A” School graduation date, pursuant to ALCOAST 316/08, and that because he did not advance to ET3 until 2 months after his graduation, the 2-month extension was necessary to entitle him to the CSTB.↩
2010-036 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he signed a 6-year reen- listment contract on November 13, 2009, to receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) with a 3.0 kicker calculated with 67 months of newly obligated service. If he had correctly signed a 21-month extension contract on April 25, 2008, obligating service through December 20, 2011, he would have been required to sign a 14-month extension contract on Jan- uary 20, 2009,...
of the Coast Guard Training and Education Manual, before reporting to “A” school on January 22, 2000, she needed to obligate sufficient service — 19 more months — to complete the 14 weeks of school and have 26 months remaining on her enlistment upon completion of the school.3 Therefore, the applicant is entitled to have the term of her January 20, 2000, extension contract corrected to 19 months. The Board finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled regarding her SRB eligibility,...
of the Personnel Manual states that to be entitled to a Zone B SRB, the member must “[h]ave completed at least 6 but not more than 10 years active service on the date of reenlistment or the operative date of the extension.” Therefore, no reenlistment contract that the applicant signed prior to his 6th anniversary would entitle him to a Zone B SRB, and the promises of the SRB on the contract and Page 7 dated June 19, 2009, are clearly erroneous. Because his then-current enlistment ran...
This final decision, dated May 2, 2012, is signed by the three duly appointed members APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a chief operations specialist (OSC) asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is eligible to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 on his sixth active duty anniversary. SRBs vary according to the length of each member’s active duty service, the number of months of service newly obligated by the reenlistment or extension of...
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. The Coast Guard paid him the SRB based on only 11 months of newly obligated service because in February 2008, the applicant had signed a 36-month extension contract to obligate service to accept transfer orders. of the Personnel Manual, the applicant could not accept his transfer orders without signing at least a three-year extension.6 The...
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD, COMDT- INST M1000.6A, PERSONNEL MANUAL, Art. of the Personnel Manual, he would have reenlisted on October 2, 2009, so that he would be entitled to the SRB and not have any previously obligated service remaining to run on his prior enlistment, which would reduce his SRB.10 The Board notes that the applicant asked to be reen- 8 UNITED STATES COAST GUARD, COMDTINST M1000.6A, PERSONNEL MANUAL, Art. However, the Coast Guard transferred the applicant with only one year...
The JAG stated that although the applicant’s September 30, 2008, enlistment/reenlistment contract states that he was entitled to receive an SRB, he was not eligible for an SRB because he served only 11 months on active duty when he integrated into the regular Coast Guard, and a reservist must have served at least 12 months continuous active duty for an enlistment in the regular Coast Guard to be considered a reenlistment. The enlistment of Coast Guard Reserve personnel who are serving on...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-016
Accordingly, the JAG recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record by voiding his June 23, 2007, extension contract and his March 9, 2009, reenlistment contract, and entering a six-year extension contract dated July 17, 2007, for a Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 304/07. The Board finds that when the applicant signed the 30-month extension contract on June 23, 2007, to obligate service for the transfer to Petaluma, he should have received SRB counseling pursuant to Article 3.C.3....
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2009-007
This final decision, dated July 16, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an intelligence specialist, third class (IS3), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he signed a four-year reenlistment contract on July 16, 2008, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).1 He alleged that when he received his transfer orders to Portsmouth, VA, he was erroneously counseled about his SRB eligibility and...
This final decision, dated July 16, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an intelligence specialist, third class (IS3), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he signed a four-year reenlistment contract on July 16, 2008, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).1 He alleged that when he received his transfer orders to Portsmouth, VA, he was erroneously counseled about his SRB eligibility and...