DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
___________________________
Application for Correction
of Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX No. 2001-115
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
___________________________
FINAL DECISION
This final decision, dated May 16, 2002, is signed by the three duly appointed
Ulmer, Chair:
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 proceeding was docketed on July 25, 2001,
upon the BCMR's receipt of the applicant's complete application for correction of his
military record.
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
The applicant asked the Board to change the date of his indefinite reenlistment
from June 1, 2001 to June 2, 2001. This correction would permit him to be paid for leave
sold at the E-8 pay grade rather than the E-7 pay grade.
The applicant was advanced from E-7 to E-8 on June 1, 2001. Also at this time, he
was planning to make a permanent change of station (PCS) move. However, before
transferring, he was required to extend his enlistment or to reenlist so that he would
have enough obligated service to complete a tour of duty at the new duty station. So,
on June 1, 2001, he signed an indefinite reenlistment agreement,i at which time he sold
30 days of leave. He was paid for this leave at the E-7 pay grade. He alleged that he
was incorrectly advised that if he reenlisted on the day that he was advanced, he would
be able to sell 30 days of leave at the E-8 rather than the E-7 rate. The applicant’s
i Per ALCOAST 174/01, “Effective April 1, 2001, active duty members, E-5 and above, with at
least 10 years of active duty, who desire to continue on active duty, are required to reenlist for
an indefinite period upon completion of any obligated service that takes them beyond their 10
year anniversary date.” This message also stated “federal statute only allows service members
to sell leave upon reenlistment, first extension or in connection with separation/retirement
processing. Therefore, this will be a member’s last opportunity to sell lump sum leave prior to
either separating or retiring.”
commanding officer (CO) admitted that the applicant had been given this erroneous
advice.
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On November 19, 2001, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard adopted the
analysis of the Commander, Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) as the advisory
opinion. He recommended that the applicant be granted relief.
CGPC found that the applicant was incorrectly counseled that if he reenlisted on
the same day that he was advanced, he would receive pay for leave sold at his new pay
grade. However, CGPC stated that according to the Pay Manual members are paid for
leave sold at the pay grade held on the day of discharge or the day prior to the effective
date of an extension of enlistment.
CGPC concluded its advisory opinion by recommending that the following
actions be taken in this case: “The applicant’s indefinite reenlistment completed on June
1, 2001 should be cancelled. To maximize applicant’s monetary gain in selling leave, a
new indefinite reenlistment should be completed with a date any time between June 2,
2001 and June 10, 2001.” (June 10th is the date the applicant reported to his new duty
station).
Applicant’s Reply to the Views of the Coast Guard
of the Coast Guard. He agreed with them.
On December 14, 2001, the Board received the applicant’s response to the views
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the
submissions of the applicant and the Coast Guard, the military record of the applicant,
and applicable law.
1. The Board has jurisdiction of the case pursuant to section 1552 of title 10 of the
United States Code. The application was timely.
2. The applicant submitted persuasive evidence that the Coast Guard committed
an error by erroneously advising the applicant that if he reenlisted on June 1, 2001, the
date of his advancement to E-8, he would receive pay for leave sold at the E-8 rate.
Under Article 10.A.6. of the Pay Manual, the pay for leave sold is based on the pay
grade held on the day of discharge or the day prior to the effective date of an extension
of enlistment. The applicant should have been advised to reenlist on June 2, 2001,
rather than June 1, 2001, to receive pay for leave sold at the E-8 pay rate.
3. Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to relief.
ORDER
The application of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX USCG, for correction of his
military record is granted.
The applicant’s indefinite reenlistment dated June 1, 2001, shall be corrected to
show that he reenlisted for an indefinite period on June 2, 2001 and that he sold 30 days
of leave at that time. He shall be paid for this leave at the E-8 rate. The Coast Guard
shall pay the applicant the sum he is due as a result of this correction.
Robert C. Ashby
David H. Kasminoff
Sherri L. Pappas
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2004-016
This final decision, dated June 30, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that, upon his indefinite reenlistment on October 29, 2002, he sold 30 days of accrued annual leave. of the Personnel Manual, members being discharged may sell leave and that members may sell a maximum of 60 days of unused annual leave during their careers.1 CGPC stated that the applicant sold 30 days of leave when he...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2008-074
The date the member executes an indefinite reenlistment will be the last opportunity for the member to sell leave until such time as the member retires/separates, pursuant to article 7.A.20 of [the Personnel Manual]. ALPERSRU 1/01 required personnel officers to counsel members who were reenlisting indefinitely about the reenlistment being their last opportunity to sell leave prior to their retirement. Therefore, the Board finds that it is in the interest of justice to allow the applicant...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2005-152
In his application to the BCMR, the applicant alleged that when he reenlisted on May 2, 2003, he was not advised that because he was signing an indefinite reenlistment it was his last opportunity to sell leave until he retired from the Coast Guard. In that case, the JAG recommended that the Board grant relief because there was no evidence in the applicant’s record that he was counseled about the lump sum leave policy when he signed the indefinite reenlistment contract. CGPC stated in...
In his application to the BCMR, the applicant alleged that when he reenlisted on May 2, 2003, he was not advised that because he was signing an indefinite reenlistment it was his last opportunity to sell leave until he retired from the Coast Guard. In that case, the JAG recommended that the Board grant relief because there was no evidence in the applicant’s record that he was counseled about the lump sum leave policy when he signed the indefinite reenlistment contract. CGPC stated in...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-161
Effective 1 September 2008, members who are currently serving on an indefinite reenlistment contract are authorized to enter into a new indefinite reenlistment, one time, during a career for the purpose of selling leave. PSC further stated the following in pertinent part: The Coast Guard’s policy at the time of the time of the applicant’s indefinite reenlistment was, by virtue of an indefinite reenlistment, to provide members the opportunity to sell leave upon entering into a reenlistment...
CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2011-005
leave when they reenlist indefinitely. The PSC stated that the Coast Guard’s policy is “to provide members the opportunity to sell leave before entering into [an indefinite reenlistment] contract. Effective 1 September 2008, members who are currently serving on an indefinite reenlistment contract are authorized to enter into a new indefinite reenlistment, one time, during a career for the purpose of selling leave.
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2004-097
This final decision, dated November 17, 2004, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that 11.5 days of leave that he sold at the end of his enlistment with the Army National Guard should not be deducted from the 60 days of leave that he is allowed to sell during his military career. § 501(b)(5) by adding subparagraph (D) to provide that the 60-day limitation shall not apply to “leave accrued … by a member...
CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2006-124-TechAmend
The JAG also stated that the applicant was legally entitled to the remaining Zone B SRB payments for his 1998 reenlistment although the SRB regulations did not expressly address the unusual circumstances of the applicant’s case.3 The JAG recommended that the Board void the 2002 contract; reinstate the June 15, 1998, contract to make the applicant eligible for further SRB installments for his service from October 26, 2002, through June 14, 2004; and enter an indefinite reenlistment contract...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-253
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. In this regard, PSC stated that based on the statements provided by the applicant’s unit, the applicant was improperly counseled on his ability to sell leave upon executing an indefinite reenlistment contract and, if he had been properly counseled, he would have sold leave upon his indefinite reenlistment. However, indefinite reenlistments...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2012-039
The applicant stated that since that transfer, he has taken leave at every 1 Whenever a member reenlists, his record automatically shows that he was discharged from his prior enlistment the day before the date of reenlistment. of the Personnel Manual, which authorizes upon discharge a lump sum payment of unused leave “to a maximum career total of 60 days.” opportunity, “but the high operational tempo of the unit will not permit me to take the 65 days of leave needed to get below the 75 days...