Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | Education Benefits | 2011-062
Original file (2011-062.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
 

 

 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 

Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
 

FINAL DECISION 
BCMR Docket No. 2011-062 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

The applicant asked the Board to reduce the term of his current extension contract from 
36  months  to  9  months  so  that  he  can  leave  active  duty  to  pursue  his  educational  goals.    He 
alleged that in March 2009 he received orders to attend ET “A” School, which required that he 
have 36 months of obligated service, and that his command had him sign a 36-month extension 
contract to accept the orders.  However, he later learned that, because his enlistment was not due 
to end until September 5, 2011, and the extension become operative at the end of his enlistment, 
he should have extended his enlistment for only 9 months.  To support these claims, he submitted 
his 4-year enlistment contract dated September 6, 2007; his training orders requiring him to have 
36 months of obligated service upon graduation from ET “A” School on December 16, 2009; and 
his 36-month extension contract showing that it was signed to obligate service for training. 

 
 
The  Judge  Advocate  General  (JAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard  recommended  that  the  Board 
grant partial relief in this case.  The JAG stated that under the Training and Education Manual in 
effect  in  March  2009,  the  applicant  was  required  to  have  36  months  of  obligated  service  upon 
graduating from ET “A” School but that in May 2009, the manual was revised to require just 34 
months of obligated service.  Therefore, the applicant needed to obligate service through at least 
October 15, 2012, to accept the orders to ET “A” School, which ended on December 16, 2009.  
Because  the  applicant’s  enlistment  already  obligated  him  to  serve  through  September  5,  2011, 
the  JAG  stated,  his  enlistment  should  have  been  extended  for  only  14  months  to  November  5, 
2012.    The  JAG  recommended  that  the  Board  correct  the  term  of  the  extension  to  14  months.  
The applicant agreed with this recommendation. 

 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS  

Enclosure (3) to  the Coast  Guard’s Training and  Education Manual  in  effect  since May 
2009  shows  that  the  duration  of  ET  “A”  School  is  22  weeks,  and  Table  7-3  shows  that  the 
obligated service requirement for attending a 22-week “A” school is 34 months.  Chapter 7.F.13. 
of  the  manual  states  that  “[t]he  period  of  obligated  service  will  commence  on  the  date  of 
graduation  from  course  of  instruction.”    Therefore,  to  attend  a  session  of  ET  “A”  School  that 
ended on December 16, 2009, the applicant had to obligate service through at least October 15, 
2012.  Because his  enlistment  already ran through September 5, 2011, he needed to  extend his 
enlistment for only 14 months, rather than 36 months, to attend ET “A” School.  Therefore, relief 
should be granted by correcting the term of his extension from 36 months to 14 months. 

 

 

 

The  military  record  of  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCG,  shall  be  corrected 
by reducing the term of his March 31, 2009, extension contract from 36 months to 14 months so 
that his new expiration of enlistment date shall be November 5, 2012.   

ORDER 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 James E. McLeod 

 

 

 
 Vicki J. Ray 

 

 

 
 Julia Doig Wilcox 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 
 
 
September  29, 2011   
Date 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 



Similar Decisions

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2010-036

    Original file (2010-036.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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,...

  • CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2010-036

    Original file (2010-036.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...

  • CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2010-035

    Original file (2010-035.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On July 12, 2007, he signed a 9-month extension contract, extending his enlistment from July 11, 2007, through April 10, 2011. The PSC noted that the applicant enlisted on July 11, 2006, for four years; that he would have graduated from AET “A” School on April 18, 2008; and that the obligated service requirement for AET “A” School is 32 months. However, the PSC concluded that because the applicant “upon graduation, would have had only 23 months remaining on his con- tract, he was obligated...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2005-165

    Original file (2005-165.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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,...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2009-209

    Original file (2009-209.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 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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-098

    Original file (2002-098.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated February 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he would receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for the full 72 months (six years) for which he reen- listed on July 18, 2002. 2002-098 p. 2 celed the extension contract, it would still count as previously obligated service and reduce his SRB by almost half: if he reenlisted in September 2002 before the...

  • CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2004-022

    Original file (2004-022.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated July 27, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct the term of an extension contract in his record dated June 10, 2002, from four months to two months. The applicant alleged that he signed the four-month contract in order to obligate sufficient service to attend AVT “A” School. CGPC stated that the applicant’s extension contract was prepared based on a projected start date for the...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2012-038

    Original file (2012-038.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2010-059

    Original file (2010-059.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    His record also contains a Page 7 documenting SRB counseling on April 15, 2009, and stating that he would receive an SRB based on 22 months of newly obligated service as a result of reenlisting for 4 years. The Page 7 also states that he was eligible to reenlist or extend his enlistment “for a maximum of 4 years.” The signatures on the reenlistment contract are dated April 15, 2009, but the typed date of reenlistment on the front page is July 12, 2011. In response to the JAG’s...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2005-069

    Original file (2005-069.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated November 17, 2005, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by replacing his six- year reenlistment contract with a six-year extension contract so that he will receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 calculated with 72 months of newly obli- gated service instead of 52 months. Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33 states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member must...