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 Chair docketed the case on December 28, 2007, upon 
receipt of the applicant’s completed application, and assigned it to staff member J. Andrews to 
prepare the decision for the Board as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated September 11, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
The applicant, a marine science technician, third class (MST3) in the Coast Guard Select-
 
ed Reserve (SELRES), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is entitled to an 
$8,000.00 bonus for signing a six-year enlistment contract on May 25, 2007.  He stated that his 
“decision to enlist in the Selected Reserve component of the USCG included the understanding 
that  an  $8000  bonus  would  be  awarded  for  my  service  upon  the  completion  of  ‘A’  School 
training.”  However, after he enlisted in the Reserve and completed “A” School, the Coast Guard 
refused to pay him the bonus.   
 

In support of his allegations, the applicant submitted a copy of a CG-3307 (“Page 7”), 
which was signed by him and his recruiter on the day he enlisted, May 25, 2007, and which states 
the following: 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2008-048 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

FINAL DECISION 

 
I have been advised that I am eligible for a  $   8000      SELRES enlistment or affiliation incentive 
bonus.  Receipt of this bonus commits me to SELRES participation through     5 / 24 / 13  .  I 
hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the contents of COMDTINST 7220.1 
Series, ALCOAST 056/06 and the Selected Reserve Bonus Matrix (updated 02/01/06). 

In addition, the applicant submitted an email dated September 24, 2007, from a Military 
Pay Technician for the Personnel Services Center to a yeoman at the applicant’s unit.  The Mili-
tary Pay Technician stated that the applicant 

 
is not eligible to receive a SELRES Enlistment Bonus.  The member’s pg 7 was signed on 2007 
May 25 and enlisted into the SELRES on the same day making ALCOAST 064/07 the effective 

ALCOAST in determining this member’s eligibility to a SELRES Bonus, not ALCOAST 056/06 
as is indicated on the member’s pg 7.  Now, after review of ALCOAST 064/07, you will see that 
the MST rate is not authorized a SELRES Enlistment Bonus.  Only the IV, MK and OS ratings are 
listed as eligible ratings according to paragraph 3(a) of ALCOAST 064/07. … If the member does 
feel that he was miscounseled then I would strongly advise the member to submit a BCMR request 
for their determination in the matter as it is the only course of action that I am aware of that has the 
authority to pursue this further. 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

On May 25, 2007, the applicant enlisted in the Selected Reserve for six years.  He had 
never previously served in the military.  The Page 7 dated May 25, 2007, with the promise of the 
$8,000.00  enlistment  bonus  is  entered  in  his  official  military  record.    His  enlistment contract, 
however, includes only the following promises and commitments in Block B: 
 

•  Annex R, which is incorporated by reference, provides that the applicant will enlist in 
the RA program, attend Reserve Enlisted Basic Indoctrination (REBI) beginning on June 
17,  2007,  attend  MST  “A”  School  beginning  on  July 2, 2007, and participate satisfac-
torily  in  the  SELRES  for  six  years  by  attending  at  least  90%  of  scheduled  drills  and 
twelve days of annual training each year. 
•  Annex U, which is incorporated by reference, concerns the applicant’s eligibility for 
educational benefits under the Montgomery G.I. Bill. 
•  Attendance at REBI from June 17 to 29, 2007. 
•  Guaranteed MST “A” School from July 2 to August 30, 2007. 

Directly below these entries in Block B of the contract, the applicant initialed the follow-
ing statement:  “The agreements in this section and attached annex(es) are all the promises made 
to  me  by  the  Government.  ANYTHING  ELSE  ANYONE  HAS  PROMISED  ME  IS  NOT 
VALID AND WILL NOT BE HONORED.”  In addition, in Block D of the contract, the appli-
cant signed below the following statement:   

 
“I CERTIFY THAT I HAVE CAREFULLY READ THIS DOCUMENT.  ANY QUESTIONS I 
HAD WERE EXPLAINED TO MY SATISFACTION.  I FULLY UNDERSTAND THAT ONLY 
THOSE  AGREEMENTS  IN  SECTION  B  OF  THIS  DOCUMENT  OR  RECORDED  ON  THE 
ATTACHED ANNEX(ES) WILL BE HONORED.  ANY OTHER PROMISES OR GUARAN-
TEES  MADE  TO  ME  BY  ANYONE  ARE  WRITTEN  BELOW:  (If  none,  X  “NONE”  and 
initial.)  NONE   [applicant’s initials]     (Initials of enlistee/reenlistee) 

The applicant completed REBI and MST “A” School and began serving in the SELRES 

 

 

 

 

 
 
as an MST3 on August 30, 2007. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On May 20, 2008, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted an 
advisory opinion and recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request but grant alter-
nate relief by giving him the option of (a) having his enlistment voided so that he can be dis-
charged or (b) “correct[ing] the errors on the CG-3307 dated 25 May 2007, as follows:  to delete 
$8000 and reflect $0.”   

 
The JAG admitted that the Page 7 dated May 25, 2007, “does document that counseling 
took place and therefore aids in supporting Applicant’s allegation of error.”  However, the JAG 
stated, the applicant was not eligible for a bonus under ALCOAST 064/07 because he was join-
ing the MST rating and the Page 7, which references the prior, canceled ALCOAST 056/06, was 
“invalid, erroneous, and unauthorized.”  The JAG argued that the relief requested by the appli-
cant  “is  an  inappropriate  remedy,  as  no  authority  exists  within  ALCOAST  064/07  to  pay  the 
SELRES enlistment bonus for the MST rating.”   
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
invited him to respond within thirty days.  No response was received.  

On May 22, 2008, the Chair sent the applicant a copy of the JAG’s advisory opinion and 

 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

Article  3.A.1.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  states  that  the  enlistment  bonus  program  is  an 
incentive to attract qualified personnel to critical skills or ratings to help meet recruiting goals.  
The program applies to new enlistees. 

 
ALCOAST 056/06, which was issued on February 1, 2006, and cited on the Page 7 pre-

 
pared by the applicant’s recruiter, states the following: 

 
2.  SELRES Enlistment Bonus. 
  A. Eligibility Requirement for Initial Enlistment (new accession with no prior military service) 
under the RP, RK, or RX programs:  Applicant must enlist in either the MK, MST, or OS ratings 
for at least six years and must complete initial active duty for training (IADT).  Applicants may be 
assigned either to an RPAL vacancy or as an over billet. 
  B.    Bonus  Amount:    A  total  of  6,000  dollars  is  authorized  to  be  paid  in  two  equal  amounts.  
(3,000 dollars may be paid after completion of IADT and 3,000 dollars may be paid one year later 
if  participation  standards  contained  in  Chapter  4  of  [Reserve  Policy  Manual]  have  been  met).  
IADT  consists  of  basic  training or Reserve Enlisted Basic Indoctrination (REBI) plus A-School 
completion if required. 
 
3.  Prior Service Enlistment Bonus. 
  A.  Eligibility requirement for former enlisted member with over seven years nine months but less 
than 13 years of combined military service:  Member must commit to either a three-year or a six-
year  SELRES  agreement  under  the  RQ  program  and  must  serve  in  the  BM,  MK,  MST,  or  OS 
ratings as an E-5 or above.  Applicants may be assigned either to an RPAL vacancy or as an over 
billet. 
  B.  Bonus Amounts: 
     (1)  For a six-year SELRES agreement, a total of 8,000 dollars is authorized to be paid in two 
equal amounts. … 
 
4.  Affiliation Bonus. 
  A.  Eligibility requirement for RELAD personnel in the BM, MK, MST, or OS ratings, E-5 or 
above, who are obligated to serve the remainder of their initial eight-year military service obliga-
tion (MSO) in the Ready Reserve:  Member agrees to affiliate with the SELRES for a minimum of 
three years after RELAD. … 

 

 
2.  The following eligibility criteria and bonus amounts are effective immediately and will remain 
in effect until further notice.  Applicants who were eligible to receive a bonus under the provisions 
of [ALCOAST 056/06] will remain eligible under those provisions for 45 days after the release 
date  of  this  ALCOAST.    For  the  purpose  of  this  ALCOAST  and  the  SELRES  bonus  program, 
critical units are defined as Port Security Units (PSU) and Naval Coastal Warfare units (NCW) 
 
3.  SELRES Enlistment Bonus. 
  A. Eligibility Requirement for Initial Enlistment (new accession with no prior military service) 
under the RP, RK, RX, or RA programs:  Applicant must enlist in either the IV, MK, or OS ratings 
for at least six years and must complete initial active duty for training (IADT).  Applicants must be 
assigned to a vacant billet.  Applicants assigned to an overbilleted or unbudgeted position are not 
authorized to receive this bonus. 
  B.    Bonus  Amount:    A  total  of  6,000  dollars  is  authorized  to  be  paid  in  two  equal  amounts.  
(3,000 dollars may be paid after completion of IADT and 3,000 dollars may be paid one year later 
if participation standards contained in Chapter 4 of [the Reserve Policy Manual] have been met).  
IADT  consists  of  basic  training or Reserve Enlisted Basic Indoctrination (REBI) plus A-School 
completion if required. 
 
4.  Prior Service Enlistment Bonus. 
  A.    Eligibility  requirements  for  active  duty  Coast  Guard  and  non-Coast  Guard  prior  enlisted 
members with no remaining military service obligation (MSO) and over seven years nine months 
but less than 13 years of combined military service:  Member must commit to either a three-year or 
a six-year SELRES agreement, be an E-4 or above under the RQ program, and in the FS, MK, or 
OS  ratings  at  a  critical  unit  or  in  the  IV,  MK,  or  OS  ratings  at  a  non-critical  unit.    Applicants 
assigned to an overbilleted or unbudgeted position are not authorized to receive this bonus. 
  B.  Bonus Amounts: 
     (1)  For a six-year SELRES agreement in a critical rate at a critical unit, a total of 8,000 dollars 
is authorized to be paid in two equal amounts. … 
 
5.  Affiliation Bonus. 
  A.  Eligibility requirement for RELAD personnel in the FS, MK, or OS ratings  … 
 

PREVIOUS BCMR DECISIONS 

ALCOAST  064/07,  which  was  issued  on  February  5,  2007,  announced  new  eligibility 

criteria for SELRES enlistment and affiliation bonuses as follows: 

 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-027, the applicant had been promised a Reserve enlistment 
bonus  by  her  recruiter.    However,  she  was  ineligible  for  the  bonus  because  she  had  not  yet 
graduated  from  high  school.    The  Chief  Counsel  recommended  that  the  Board  grant  relief 
because, although the government is not estopped from repudiating erroneous advice given by its 
officials, the bonus was promised her, she provided due consideration for it, and acted promptly 
when she discovered the error.  The Board granted the applicant’s request. 
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-121, the applicant stated that he had been promised a Level II 
$2000 SELRES enlistment bonus by his recruiter.  The bonus was cited on his enlistment con-
tract  and  in  a  Page  7  dated  the  same  day.    He  did  not  receive  the  bonus  because  he  was  not 
assigned to a designated critical unit under the ALCOAST in effect.  The Chief Counsel stated 
that  the  contract  was  voidable  so  the  applicant  could  be  discharged  but  recommended  against 
granting the applicant the unauthorized bonus. The Board, however, granted relief, finding that 
while “the government may repudiate the erroneous advice of its officers or agents, … whenever 

reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the erroneous 
advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit.” 
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 1999-135, the applicant’s record contained a Page 7 dated the day 
of  enlistment  and  promising  her  a  Level  II  $2000  SELRES  enlistment  bonus,  which  was  not 
mentioned on her enlistment contract.  She did not receive the bonus because she had not enlisted 
in a rating designated as “critical” under the ALCOAST in effect.  The Chief Counsel made the 
same recommendation as in BCMR Docket No. 1999-121, and the Board granted relief for the 
reasons stated in that case as well.   
 
 
In BCMR Docket No. 2005-117, the applicant’s enlistment contract cited a “RES BON 
PG7” along with the incorporated annexes, and the Page 7, dated the day of enlistment, docu-
mented the promised $4000 Level II bonus under ALCOAST 268/04.  He did not receive the 
bonus because he had not enlisted in a critical rating or been assigned to a critical unit.  Although 
the JAG recommended only that the Board make the contract voidable, the Board granted relief, 
finding that the recruiter had promised the applicant the bonus as an enticement to enlist and that, 
“whenever reasonable, such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the 
erroneous advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit.” 
 
 
In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-006,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  promised  a  $2,000 
SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting in the health services rating as well as a $5,000 bonus for 
having a certain number of college credits.  His enlistment contract incorporated Annex T, which 
documented  the  promised  bonuses.    He  received  only  the  $5,000  bonus  because  the  health 
services rating was not one of the designated “critical” ratings.  Although the JAG recommended 
only that the Board make the contract voidable, the Board granted relief, finding that the recruiter 
had promised the applicant the bonus as an enticement to enlist and that “whenever reasonable, 
such promises should be kept, especially when the member relies on the erroneous advice and 
gives due consideration for the promised benefit, i.e., a four-year enlistment in the Coast Guard.”   
 

In BCMR Docket No. 2007-098, the applicant’s record contained a Page 7 promising a 
$8,000 SELRES reenlistment bonus, which was not mentioned on his reenlistment contract.  He 
was  not  eligible  for  the  bonus  because  he  had  already  received  one  and  regulation  prohibits 
reservists from receiving more than one SELRES reenlistment bonus.  The JAG recommended 
that the Board find the contract voidable, but the Board ordered the Coast Guard to pay the bonus 
for  the  reasons  cited  in  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-006  and  because,  even  though  he  was 
reenlisting, the applicant was not a member at the time he signed the contract and so had to rely 
on the advice provided by his recruiter. 

 
In BCMR Docket No. 2007-119, the applicant’s record contained a Page 7 promising a 
$4,000 SELRES enlistment bonus, which was not mentioned on his enlistment contract.  He was 
not  eligible  for  the  bonus  because  he  was  not  enlisting  in  a  critical  rating.    The  JAG  recom-
mended that the Board deny relief, but the Board ordered the Coast Guard to pay the bonus for 
the same reasons cited in BCMR Docket No. 2007-006. 

 
In BCMR Docket No. 2007-151, the applicant’s record contained a Page 7 promising a 
$4,000 SELRES enlistment bonus, which was not mentioned on his enlistment contract.  He was 
not  eligible  for  the  bonus  because  he  was  not  enlisting  in  a  critical  rating.    The  JAG  recom-

mended that the Board find the contract voidable, but the Board ordered the Coast Guard to pay 
the bonus for the same reasons cited in BCMR Docket No. 2007-006. 

 
In  BCMR  Docket  No.  2007-214,  the  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  promised  a  $6,000 
SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting to serve as a PS3 at a vessel inspection unit.  The prom-
ise of the bonus was documented on an “Enlistment Package Check-Off List,” a “Reservation 
Request,” and a Page 7 dated the day of his enlistment.  The JAG recommended that the Board 
deny relief because the applicant had not enlisted in one of the critical ratings—MK, MST, and 
OS—listed in ALCOAST 056/06.  The Board granted relief for the same reasons as in BCMR 
Docket No. 2007-006.  

 
In BCMR Docket No. 2008-005, the applicant’s record contained a Page 7 promising him 
a $6,000 SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting for six years in the OS rating.  The promise of 
the bonus was also documented on an “Enlistment Package Check-Off List.”  The JAG recom-
mended that the Board deny the applicant’s request because he was not eligible for any of the 
bonuses authorized under ALCOAST 056/06 since he had six years of prior military service and 
his original military service obligation had expired.  The Board granted relief because the “appli-
cant’s recruiter promised him the $6,000 bonus for enlisting, and the applicant has already given 
consideration on the contract by enlisting in the SELRES for six years.  Since he had never been 
a member of the Coast Guard, he had to rely on his recruiter to inform him of his entitlements.  
There is no evidence that he would have enlisted had he not been promised the $6,000 bonus. … 
The Board finds that the applicant’s enlistment contract is voidable because of the false promise 
of the $6,000 bonus.  However, releasing him from the contract by discharging him more than a 
year later would not correct the error or remove the injustice that has been done.” 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

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 applicable law: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.  

1. 

 
3. 

The application was timely. 
 

2. 

The applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Coast Guard 
erred when his recruiter promised him an $8,000.00 SELRES enlistment bonus for enlisting for 
six years on May 25, 2007.  His recruiter documented that promise on a Page 7 dated the day he 
enlisted.  Although the Page 7 was not incorporated into the enlistment contract, the promise of 
the bonus was made by the recruiter and presumably approved by the Recruiting Command on 
the day he enlisted since the Page 7 was entered in his official record.  Therefore, the Page 7 must 
be considered part and parcel of the bargain struck between the Coast Guard and the applicant on 
May 25, 2007, when the applicant committed himself to six years of service in the SELRES. 

The applicant was not actually eligible for an enlistment bonus on May 25, 2007.  
Although  he  was  promised  an  $8,000.00  bonus  under  ALCOAST  056/06,  that  ALCOAST 
authorized only a $6,000.00 bonus for new recruits and the eligibility criteria therein expired 45 
days after the issuance of ALCOAST 064/07 on February 5, 2007.  ALCOAST 064/07 did not 
authorize any enlistment bonus for reservists joining the MST rating. 

The JAG argued that the Board should offer the applicant an opportunity to void 
his enlistment contract because of the erroneous promise of the enlistment bonus.  However, the 
Board  believes  that,  whenever  reasonable,  such  promises  should  be  kept,  especially  when  the 
member relies on the erroneous advice and gives due consideration for the promised benefit—
i.e.,  a  six-year  enlistment  in  the  SELRES.    Although  the  Government  is  not  estopped  from 
repudiating the bad promises made by its employees,1 this Board has “an abiding moral sanction 
to determine . . . the true nature of an alleged injustice and to take steps to grant thorough and 
fitting relief.”2  The applicant’s recruiter promised him the $8,000.00 bonus for enlisting, and the 
applicant  has  already  given  consideration  on  the  contract  by  enlisting  in  the  SELRES  for  six 
years.  Since he had never been a member of the Coast Guard, he had to rely on his recruiter to 
inform him of his entitlements.  There is no evidence that he would have enlisted had he not been 
promised  an  $8,000.00  bonus.   Releasing  the  applicant  from  the  contract  by  discharging  him 
more than a year later would not correct the error or remove the injustice that has been done.  

 
4. 

 
7. 

 
5. 

 
6. 

The  facts  of  this  case  are  very  similar  to  the  facts  in  several  of  the  prior  cases 
summarized above.  Like the applicants in BCMR Docket Nos. 2008-005, 2007-214, 2007-207, 
2007-006, 1999-135, and 1999-027, the applicant in this case was promised an enlistment bonus 
by his recruiter, although he did not meet the eligibility requirements, and gave due consideration 
for the bonus.  In Docket No. 1999-027, the Chief Counsel recommended that the Board grant 
relief, but in most cases the JAG recommended denying the applicants the unauthorized bonuses.  
In all these cases, the Board granted relief, finding that although the government is not estopped 
from  repudiating  the  advice  of  its  employees,  the  promises  made  by  the  Coast  Guard  to  new 
recruits should be kept when the recruits give due consideration for the promised benefit.   

Although the applicant was not eligible for the SELRES enlistment bonus he was 
erroneously  promised  by  his  recruiter  and  the  Recruiting  Command,  the  Board  finds  that  the 
Coast Guard’s refusal to pay him the $8,000.00 bonus he was promised and for which he has 
given due consideration by enlisting for six years constitutes an injustice3 that must be corrected.  
The  Board  notes  that  the  criteria  for  an  enlistment  bonus  under  the  ALCOASTs  include  first 
completing IADT, which the applicant has already done by successfully finishing REBI and MST 
“A” School, to receive the first half of the bonus, and then fulfilling the SELRES participation 
standards under Chapter 4 of the Reserve Policy Manual during his following year to receive the 
second half.  It is not clear in the record before the Board whether the applicant met the SELRES 
participation standards in his first full year after completing MST “A” School. 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be granted by awarding him $4000—
the first half of the promised $8,000.00 bonus—since he has already completed REBI and MST 
“A” School and by ordering the Coast Guard to pay him the second half of the promised bonus if 
he met the participation standards under Chapter 4 of the Reserve Policy Manual during his first 
year following MST “A” School.   
                                                 
1 Montilla v. United States, 457 F.2d 978 (Ct. Cl. 1972); Goldberg v. Weinberger, 546 F.2d 477 (2d Cir. 1976), cert. 
denied sub nom Goldberg v. Califano, 431 U.S. 937 (1977). 
2 Caddington v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 604, 607 (Ct. Cl. 1959).   
3 Reale v. United States, 208 Ct. Cl. 1010, 1011 (1976) (finding that for purposes of the BCMRs under 10 U.S.C. 
§ 1552,  “injustice”  is  “treatment  by  military  authorities  that  shocks  the  sense  of  justice,  but  is  not  technically 
illegal”). 

military record is granted as follows: 

 
  The  Coast  Guard  shall  pay  him  $4,000.00—the  first  half  of  the  $8,000.00  enlistment 
bonus  he  was  promised  on  the  CG-3307  dated  May  25,  2007—because  he  has  already 
successfully  completed  REBI  and  MST  “A”  School.    In  addition,  if  he  meets  or  has  met  the 
SELRES participation standards contained in Chapter 4 of the Reserve Policy Manual during the 
year  following  his  completion  MST  “A”  School,  the  Coast  Guard  shall  pay  him  a  second 
$4,000.00—the second half of the enlistment bonus he was promised by his recruiter on May 25, 
2007—for a total potential enlistment bonus of $8,000.00.  

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The application of MST3 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCGR, for correction of his 

ORDER 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

  

 
 
 Philip B. Busch 

 

 
 Kathryn Sinniger 

 

 

 
 Dorothy J. Ulmer