FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Attorney-Advisor: 
 
 
This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section 
425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  It was docketed on January 6, 1999, after the 
Board received the applicant’s complete application. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  September  23,  1999,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly  

RELIEF REQUESTED 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 1999-040 
 
 
   

 
 
The  applicant,  a  xxxxxxxxxxxx  on  active  duty  in  the  Coast  Guard,  asked  the 
Board  to  correct  his  military  record  to  show  that  on  September  21,  199x,  he  was  dis-
charged  and  reenlisted  for  six  years  (instead  of  the  six-year  extension  contract  he 
actually signed).  The correction would allow the applicant to receive a Selective Reen-
listment Bonus (SRB).   
 

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

The applicant alleged that prior to his sixth anniversary on active duty, his com-
mand counseled him that he could receive an SRB by extending his enlistment by up to 
six years.  He was advised that under ALDIST 046/98, he would receive a Zone A SRB 
with a multiple of one.  The applicant alleged that he extended his contract for six years 
to  receive  the  SRB.    However,  the  Coast  Guard Human Resource Information Center 
thereafter informed his command that the applicant was eligible for the SRB only if he 
was discharged and reenlisted prior to his sixth anniversary.  The Center advised the 
command that the applicant should ask the BCMR to correct his record to show that he 
was discharged and reenlisted.  

 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on May 12, 198x, for four years.  He 
 
extended this contract for six months, through November 11, 199x.  On that day, he left 
the service with an honorable discharge.  
 

On March 22, 199x, the applicant reenlisted for four years.  Therefore, his sixth 
anniversary  on  active  duty  fell  on    September  22,  199x.    On  September  21,  199x,  the 
applicant signed a contract extending his enlistment for six years.  The contract shows 
that he was told he would receive an SRB with a multiple of one under ALDIST 046/98. 
 
 
On March 29, 1998, the Commandant of the Coast Guard issued ALDIST 046/98, 
which allowed members to receive an SRB if they reenlisted or extended their current 
enlistments between April 1, 1998 and September 30, 1998.  ALDIST 046/98 provided 
that  members  in  the  xx  rating  who  extended  their  enlistments  or  reenlisted  would 
receive an SRB calculated with a multiple of one. 

 
On  December 7, 1998, the applicant’s commanding officer wrote a letter to the 
Chairman  of  the  BCMR  stating  that  the  applicant  had  been  wrongly  advised  that  he 
could receive an SRB by extending his contract, rather than reenlisting. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On September 7, 1999, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that 

 
 
the Board grant the applicant’s request.   
 
 
The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant should be granted relief because he 
was eligible to receive the SRB and clearly desired to commit himself to an additional 
six years of service.  The Chief Counsel also stated that the applicant is an outstanding 
performer who “took appropriate action to rectify the alleged error after its discovery.”  
The  Chief  Counsel explained that the applicant’s “Commanding Officer did not have 
authority to first discharge the Applicant and then extend him on 21 September 199x.” 
 

 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 
 
Enclosure (1) to Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (Reenlistment Bonus Programs 
Administration), Section 2 states that “[a]ll personnel with 14 years or less active service 
who  reenlist  or  extend  for  any  period,  however,  brief, shall be counseled on the SRB 
program.    They  shall  sign  a  page  7  service  record  entry,  enclosure  (3),  outlining  the 
effect that particular action has on their SRB entitlement.” 
 

Section 3.d.(1) of Enclosure (1) states that “[m]embers with exactly 6 years active 
duty on the date of reenlistment or operative date of extension will be entitled to the 
Zone A multiple in effect for their rating if they are otherwise eligible.” 
  
 
Section 3.d.(9) of Enclosure (1) states that “[c]ommanding officers are authorized 
to effect early discharge and reenlist members within 3 months prior to their 6th, 10th, 
or 14th year active service anniversary dates (not to be confused with the normal expi-
ration of enlistment), for the purpose of qualifying for a Zone A, B, or C SRB respec-
tively.  In such cases, SRB payments will be reduced by any portion of unserved service 
obligation.” 
 
 
Enclosure (3) to the instruction states that during the three months prior to the 
end of an enlistment, each member must be counseled concerning his or her eligibility 
for an SRB, have his or her questions concerning SRBs answered, and be provided with 
a copy of Enclosure (5), which is entitled “SRB Questions and Answers.”  The counsel-
ing must be memorialized in the member’s record with a Form CG-3307 signed by the 
member. 
 

ALDIST 046/98, issued on March 29, 1998, established SRBs for personnel in cer-
tain  skill  ratings  who  reenlisted  or  extended  their  enlistments  between  April  1,  1998, 
and September 30, 1998.  The multiple to be used for calculating SRBs for members in 
the xx rating was one. 
 

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 appli-
cable law: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to section 1552 

1. 

2. 

of title 10, United States Code.  The application was timely. 
 

The applicant was improperly counseled that he could receive a Zone A 
SRB if he extended his enlistment prior to his sixth active duty anniversary date.  There-
fore, he extended his enlistment for six years on September 21, 199x.  However, accord-
ing to the Chief Counsel, the applicant’s commanding officer did not have authority to 
do this.  Thus, the applicant was denied an SRB. 
 
 
The Chief Counsel recommended that the Board grant relief because the 
applicant is an outstanding performer and because he acted promptly in seeking cor-
rection of the error. 
 

3. 

4. 

 
Under Sections 3.d.(1) and 3.d.(9) of Enclosure (1) to the instruction, the 
applicant was eligible to be discharged on September 21, 1998, within three months of 
the sixth anniversary of his enlistment, in order to reenlist.  Under ALDIST 046/98, he 
would have received a Zone A SRB with a multiple of one.  
  

 The Coast Guard erred by advising the applicant to extend his contract in 
lieu of reenlisting prior to his sixth active duty anniversary date.  Had he been properly 
counseled, the applicant would have been discharged and reenlisted on September 21, 
199x. 

5. 

 
6. 
 
 

Therefore, the applicant’s request should be granted. 

 
 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

The application for correction of the military record of XXXXXXXXX, USCG, is 

ORDER 

 

hereby granted as follows.   

 
His  record  shall  be  corrected  to  show  that  on  September  21,  199x,  he  was  dis-
charged and reenlisted for a term of six years.  The six-year extension contract he signed 
on September 21, 199x, shall be null and void.   

 
The Coast Guard shall pay the applicant the amount due him as a result of this 

 
 

correction. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
Barbara Betsock 

 

 

 
Karen L. Petronis 

 

 

 
L. L. Sutter