DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2004-016 
 
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Deputy Chair: 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title 10 and section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  On November 3, 2003, the 
BCMR docketed the applicant’s request for correction. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

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.  
The  applicant  alleged  that  at  the  time  of  his  discharge  and  reenlistment,  he  was  not 
advised  that  because  of  his  indefinite  reenlistment,  it  was  his  last  opportunity  to  sell 
leave until his retirement.   
 
 
In  support  of  his  allegations,  the  applicant  submitted  a  statement  from  a  chief 
yeoman, the Assistant Personnel Officer at his station, who stated that the applicant’s 
record  lacks  documentation  of  the  required  counseling  on  the  indefinite  reenlistment 
policy and that such counseling would have informed the applicant that the indefinite 
reenlistment was his last opportunity to sell leave. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
On June 23, 1992, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard for four years.  On 
January 29, 1996, he extended his enlistment contract for four years, through June 22, 

2000.  On March 23, 2000, he was discharged and immediately reenlisted for three years.  
This reenlistment contract indicates that he sold 30 days of accrued annual leave. 
 

On March 6, 2001, the Commandant issued ALCOAST 095/01, requiring active 
duty members in pay grades E-5 and above who have at least 10 years of active service 
and  whose  enlistments  are  ending  to  sign  indefinite  reenlistment  contracts  instead  of 
extension contracts or reenlistment contracts for a set term of years.  On March 29, 2001, 
the  Commandant  issued  ALPERSRU  1/01  to  instruct  personnel  officers  on  the  new 
indefinite reenlistment policy.  It states that a member serving on an indefinite contract 
may request separation but must do so at least six months in advance of the requested 
separation date.  The ALPERSRU further provides the following: 

 
Members subject to the new indefinite reenlistment policy should be counseled concern-
ing lump sum leave entitlements.  The date the member executes an indefinite reenlist-
ment  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]. 
 
On October 29, 2002, having performed more than ten years of active service, the 
applicant  signed  an  indefinite  reenlistment  contract.    The  contract  states  that  the 
“[m]ember is not selling leave.”  There is no evidence in the applicant’s record that he 
received the counseling required under ALPERSRU 1/01. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On March 30, 2004, the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard submitted an 
 
advisory  opinion  in  which  he  recommended  that  the  Board  grant  the  applicant’s 
request.  He based his recommendation on a memorandum on the case prepared by the 
Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC). 
 
 
CGPC stated that there is no evidence in the applicant’s record that he was coun-
seled about the lump sum leave policy when he signed the indefinite reenlistment con-
tract.    CGPC  stated  that  under  Article  7.A.20.a.  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  reenlisted  on 
March 23, 2000, and that this is the only time he has sold leave during his career.  CGPC 
further stated that, when the applicant reenlisted on October 29, 2002, he had 76.5 days 
                                                 
1  Under  37  U.S.C.  37(b),  a  member  of  the  armed  forces  “who  has  accrued  leave  to  his  credit  at  the  time  of  his 
discharge, is entitled to be paid in cash or by a check on the Treasurer of the United States for such leave on the basis 
of  the  basic  pay  to  which  he was  entitled  on  the  date  of discharge.  …    However,  the number  of  days  of  leave  for 
which  payment  is  made  may  not  exceed  sixty,  less  the  number  of  days  for  which  payment  was  previously  made 
under this section after February 9, 1976.”  This statute is reflected in Article 7.A.20.a. of the Personnel Manual, which 
authorizes upon discharge a lump sum payment of unused leave “to a maximum career total of 60 days.” 

of accrued annual leave and could have sold 30 of them.  CGPC submitted copies of the 
applicant’s Leave and Earnings Statements reflecting these numbers. 
 
CGPC stated that because there is no evidence that the applicant was properly 
 
counseled when he signed his indefinite reenlistment contract, it is in the interest of jus-
tice for the Board to correct his record “to afford him the option at this time to sell leave 
in any amount up to his unused earned leave balance, not to exceed 30 days, at the time 
he reenlisted in October 20, 2002, … with the understanding that the payment amount 
would be based on his paygrade and rate of pay at that time.”   
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On March 31, 2004, the BCMR sent the applicant a copy of the views of the Coast 
Guard  and  invited  him  to  respond  within  30  days.    On  April  9,  2004,  the  applicant 
responded, stating that he agreed with the Coast Guard’s recommendation. 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

1. 

2. 

3. 

The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the provisions of 

 
 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the 
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submissions, and appli-
cable law: 
 
 
10 U.S.C. § 1552.  The application was timely. 
 
 
Absent  evidence  to  the  contrary,  the  Board  presumes  that  Coast  Guard 
records are correct and that Coast Guard officers have acted “lawfully, correctly, and in 
good faith.” Arens v. United States, 969 F.2d 1034, 1037 (Fed. Cir. 1992); Sanders v. United 
States, 594 F.2d 804, 813 (Ct. Cl. 1979); 33 C.F.R. § 52.24(b).  Therefore, absent evidence to 
the contrary, the Board presumes that the applicant was properly counseled at the time 
he signed his indefinite reenlistment contract. 
 
 
 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.  However, the ALPERSRU contains no requirement that 
the counseling be documented by an administrative entry in the member’s record, and 
the  Board  knows  of  no  such  requirement  in  the  Personnel  Manual  or  elsewhere.  
Therefore,  the  lack  of  documentation  of  counseling  about  the  sale  of  leave  in  the 
applicant’s record is not probative of whether such counseling actually occurred. 
 
In  applying  to  the  Board,  the  applicant—who  has  an  excellent  record  of 
 
twelve years of honorable service—signed a sworn statement under penalty of law that 
he was not counseled about the effect of his indefinite reenlistment on his chance to sell 

4. 

leave prior to retirement.  The record indicates that in accordance with Article 7.A.20. of 
the Personnel Manual, he could have sold up to 30 days of leave when he signed the 
contract.    The  applicant  is  supported  in  his  request  by  his  command,  CGPC,  and  the 
Judge Advocate General.  Therefore, the Board finds that it is in the interest of justice to 
allow the applicant to sell up to 30 days of leave, assuming that he still has sufficient 
accrued leave at this time. 
 
 
 
 

Accordingly, relief should be granted. 

5. 

  

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

ORDER 

 

The application of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his military 

record is granted as follows: 

 
The Coast Guard shall correct his record to show that, upon his discharge and 
indefinite reenlistment on October 29, 2002, he sold a number of days of annual leave 
that is to be determined at his discretion, provided that it shall be no more than 30 days 
or the amount of his accrued leave at the time this order is implemented, whichever is 
less. 

 
The  Coast  Guard  shall  pay  him  any  amount  he  may  be  due  as  a  result  of  this 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

correction. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 

 
 Philip B. Busch 

 

 

 
 Richard Walter 

 

 

 
 Suzanne L. Wilson