DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2003-121
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his home of record from Honolulu, HI, to 175
San Vicente Ave, Agat, Guam. The applicant had served earlier in the Coast Guard Reserve
and listed Agat, Guam as his home of record upon that enlistment. He alleged that his 2003
enlistment contract in the regular Coast Guard contains the incorrect HI address, which was his
temporary address at the time of his 2003 enlistment.
The Judge Advocate General (TJAG) of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board
grant relief. He stated that every document in the applicant’s record except one shows that
Agat, Guam is his home of record. He stated that the applicant and his recruiter, in transferring
information from the applicant's enlistment application to his enlistment contract, made a bona
fide error in listing the Honolulu, HI address as the applicant's home of record instead of the
Agat, Guam address.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The applicant’s original enlistment contract shows Honolulu, HI as his home of record.
However, the DD form 1966 (enlistment application) he completed with his recruiter shows the
Agat, Guam address as his home of record, with the Honolulu, HI address as a current mailing
address. Accordingly, the Board agrees with TJAG that an error was committed in transferring
information from the applicant's enlistment application to his enlistment contract and that the
request for relief should be granted.
Thomas F. Muther, Jr.
Adrian Sevier
ORDER
The military record of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, shall be corrected to show that
his official “home of record” when he enlisted in 2003 was 175 XXXXXXXX Ave, Agat, Guam,
96929.
Date
Thomas H. Van Horn
The recruiter stated the following: In support of his contention, the applicant submitted a statement from his At the time of [the applicant's] enlistment, I was unfortunately unaware of the bonus offered for the Reserve MST billets. … Enlistment bonuses are not offered to everyone and are not always available. The Board finds that if the recruiter had been aware of the enlistment bonus, he would have offered the bonus to the applicant.
The applicant’s reenlistment contract further indicates the applicant was “obligating 48 new months for SRB purposes.” There is also a Career Intentions Worksheet in the record dated January 13, 2004, which contains a handwritten notation from the person administering the oath for the applicant’s reenlistment, which states “cancel extension that is to begin 07 Feb 04, reenlisting for SRB purposes.” The record also contains a memorandum dated June 17, 2004, submitted by a yeoman first class...
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. He alleged that the Coast Guard recruiter promised him the bonuses and that he (applicant) signed an enlistment contract indicating that he would receive the bonuses. He also stated that the record indicates that the bonuses requested by the applicant were not available to any service member at the time he enlisted.
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2004-076
His request was approved, and he resumed EAD after both the IDPL and ADPL CDR selec- tion boards adjourned.1 In July 2002, three months after the applicant signed his EAD contract, CGPC “started to incorporate new verbiage in all EAD orders indicating that an officer may submit a written request to be released from EAD during the timeframe that both the ADPL and IDPL boards meet for the purpose of competing on the IDPL.”2 CGPC stated that over the last few years, “several requests to...
This final decision, dated April 15, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 with a multiple of 2.5 instead of the 2.0 multiple he actually received. Coast Guard members who have at least 6 but no more than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. This provision...
This final decision, dated May 20, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked that the Board correct his record to show that upon receipt of his transfer orders on March 13, 2003, he reenlisted for six years to receive a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).1 He alleged that, upon receiving the orders, he should have been counseled about SRBs and that if he had been, he would have reenlisted for the SRB. TJAG stated that when the...
This final decision, dated December 29, 2004, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is entitled to a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with seventy-two months of newly obligated service.1 He alleged that he was miscounseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that if he had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for six years on May 13, 2003, in lieu of extending, to...
The statement indicates that the transfer orders he received in the fall of 2002 required him to obligate sufficient service to complete a full tour of duty at the new unit before reporting to it on January 19, 2003.1 Before signing a contract to obligate the service, the applicant was counseled about SRBs by a yeoman second class (YN2) at his prior command and was told that there was no multiple for MK3s but that there was a multiple for MK2s.2 At 1 Article 4.B.6. of the Personnel Manual],...
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 enlistment contract, and the need of the Coast Guard for personnel with the member’s particular skills, which is reflected in the “multiple” of the SRB authorized for the member’s skill/rating, which is published in an ALCOAST. He was counseled that pursuant to ALCOAST 182/03, he would receive a Zone A SRB calculated with 56 months of...
This final decision, dated June 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a full Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 based on his pay grade as an MK2, rather than a partial SRB reduced by previously obligated service under an extension contract. of the Personnel Manual provides that members with less than six years of active duty will not normally be...