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. 2010-046
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he extended his enlistment for 3
years, instead of 4, to accept orders to transfer to Station Venice on July 1, 2009. He alleged that a yeo-
man told him that he had to extend for 4 years, but he later learned that he could have fulfilled the
requirement by signing a 3-year contract. The applicant submitted a copy of his transfer orders, which
state that to transfer to Station Venice on July 1, 2009, he had to have 4 years of obligated service through
July 1, 2013. He also submitted a copy of Article 4.A.5.b. of the Personnel Manual, which shows that
Station Venice is one of the semi-isolated shore units for which the tour of duty is 3 years instead of 4.
The applicant first enlisted on October 24, 2005, for 4 years running through October 23, 2009.
The Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant relief
because, under Article 4.A.5.b. of the Personnel Manual, a full tour of duty at Station Venice is 3 years.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under Article 4.B.6.a. of the Personnel Manual, members with less than 6 years of service will
not normally be transferred unless they obligate service to complete a full tour of duty at the new unit.
Under Article 4.A.5.b., a full tour of duty at Station Venice is 3 years. The applicant’s records show that
he was required to extend his enlistment for 4 years before transferring to Station Venice. In fact, he
should have been required to obligate service from July 1, 2009, to July 1, 2012, not 2013. Because his
enlistment already ran through October 23, 2009, he needed to extend it for just 33 months, from October
24, 2009, to July 23, 2012, to accept his transfer orders. Accordingly, relief should be granted.
ORDER
The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show that in 2009,
he extended his enlistment for 33 months, instead of 48 months, to obligate service for a 3-year tour of
duty at Station Venice from July 1, 2009, to July 1, 2012.
August 26, 2010
Date
Donna M. Bivona
James E. McLeod
Bruce D. Burkley
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...
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
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...
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. His record does not On July 1, 2007, the applicant reported for duty to Station Miami Beach, and on July 7th...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-119.TechAm
Accordingly, the Board, on the recommendation of the Coast Guard, entered the following order correcting the applicant’s record on November 12, 2009: The application of [applicant’s name], for correction of his military record is granted. REQUEST FOR TECHNICAL AMENDMENT On March 31, 2010, the Coast Guard informed the Board that it required a technical amendment to correct the applicant’s military record as the Board directed in the original proceeding, the intent of which was to eliminate...
However, instead of receiving an SRB calculated on all six years of the contract, he received an SRB based on only three years, because the canceled extension contract constituted previously obligated service that counted against number of years of newly obligated service on which his SRB was based. Article 2 of Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (the SRB Instruction) provides that “[a]ll personnel with 14 years or less active service who reenlist or extend for any period, however brief, shall...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-016
Accordingly, the JAG recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record by voiding his June 23, 2007, extension contract and his March 9, 2009, reenlistment contract, and entering a six-year extension contract dated July 17, 2007, for a Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 304/07. The Board finds that when the applicant signed the 30-month extension contract on June 23, 2007, to obligate service for the transfer to Petaluma, he should have received SRB counseling pursuant to Article 3.C.3....
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...
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...
of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member cannot have previously received a Zone A SRB. The counseling was erroneous because the applicant received a Zone A SRB for his September 22, 2001, reenlistment, and pursuant to Article 3.C.4.a.6. Therefore, the Board finds that if the applicant had received proper SRB counseling in accordance with Article 3.C.3., he would have (a) extended his enlistment for 23 months instead of reenlisting in July 2003 and...