DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 1999-100 
 
 
   

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 April 28, 1998, upon the 
BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s completed application for correction. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  January  13,  2000,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly  

 

 
 

 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

 
 
The applicant, a xxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board to 
correct  his  military  record  to  show  that  he  was  eligible  for  a  Selective  Reenlistment 
Bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of one, rather than a multiple of one-half.  

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

 

The applicant alleged that he is receiving an SRB based on a multiple of one-half, 
rather than a multiple of one, because of an administrative error on the part of the Coast 
Guard.  He alleged that his sixth anniversary on active duty fell on November 12, 1997, 
when an SRB with a multiple of one was in effect for members in the xx rating in Zone 
A.1  He alleged that the Coast Guard had a duty to counsel him regarding his eligibility 

                                                 
1 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,  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.  Coast Guard members who have at least 21 months but no more than 6 
years of active duty service are in “Zone A.”  Members who have completed at least 6 years but no more 
than  10  years  of  active  duty  service  are  in  “Zone  B.”    Members  in  the  same  rating  may  receive  SRBs 

for this Zone A SRB but failed to do so.  Because of this failure, the applicant alleged, he 
did not reenlist until several months after his sixth anniversary, when he was in Zone B.  
The  SRB  multiple  in  effect  for  Zone  B  at  the  time  was  only  one-half.    Therefore,  the 
applicant argued, the Coast Guard’s failure to counsel him as required by the regula-
tions unjustly caused him to receive a smaller SRB. 

 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
of four years.  On July 21, 1995, he reenlisted for three years, through July 20, 1998.  

The applicant first enlisted in the Coast Guard on November 12, 1991, for a term 

 
On  September  30,  1997,  the  Commandant  of  the  Coast  Guard  issued  ALDIST 
226/97, which allowed members to receive an SRB if they reenlisted or extended their 
current  enlistments  between  October  1,  1997,  and  March  31,  1998.    The  Zone  A  SRB 
provided  for  xxs  who  extended  their  enlistments  or  reenlisted  was  calculated  with  a 
multiple of one.  The Zone B SRB authorized for xxs was one-half. 
 

The applicant’s sixth anniversary on active duty was November 12, 1997.  There 
is no form in the applicant’s record indicating that he was counseled concerning his eli-
gibility for an SRB during the three months prior to his sixth anniversary. 

 
On  March  2,  1998,  the  Commandant  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.  The Zone A SRB provided for xxs who 
extended  their  enlistments  or  reenlisted  was  calculated  with  a  multiple  of  two.    The 
Zone B SRB authorized for xxs was one-half. 

 
On July 17, 1998, the applicant reenlisted for a term of six years.  He received a 

Zone B SRB with a multiple of one-half for this reenlistment under ALDIST 046/98. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On November 17, 1999, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that 
the Board grant relief in this case by correcting his record to show that he reenlisted for 
six years on his sixth anniversary to receive a Zone A SRB with a multiple of one.  
 
 
The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant should be granted relief because he 
was never counseled concerning his eligibility for a Zone A SRB on his sixth anniver-
sary and because he “took proper action to rectify the alleged error after its discovery 
and is now willing to offer a new 6-year reenlistment as consideration for the SRB he 
requests.” 
                                                                                                                                                             
calculated with different multiples depending on which zone they are in.  Members may not receive more 
than one bonus per zone. 

 
 
The Chief Counsel further stated that on his sixth anniversary, the applicant was 
eligible for either a Zone A or a Zone B SRB, and it is not clear whether he has already 
received a Zone A SRB.  Therefore, he recommended that the Board draft its order so 
that either a Zone A or a Zone B SRB could be awarded. 
 
 
The  Chief  Counsel  also  noted  that,  because  the  applicant  had  previously  obli-
gated himself to serve through July 20, 1998, the applicant’s new SRB would be based 
on five years and three months of newly obligated service. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  November  22,  1999,  the  Chairman  sent  a  copy  of  the  Chief  Counsel’s 
advisory  opinion  to  the  applicant  and  invited  him  to  respond  within  15  days.    On 
December  6,  1999,  the  applicant  responded,  stating  that  he  agreed  with  the  Chief 
Counsel’s  recommendation  and  wished  to  have  his  record  corrected  to  show  that  he 
reenlisted for six years on his sixth anniversary for a Zone A SRB. 
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 
Section 3.d.(1) of Enclosure (1) to Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (Reenlistment 
 
Bonus  Programs  Administration)  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.  If they have pre-
viously received a Zone A bonus or no Zone A bonus is designated, they are entitled to 
a Zone B bonus if one is in effect.” 
 

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 their 
6th, 10th, and 14th anniversary dates, members must be counseled concerning their eli-
gibility for an SRB.  The counseling must be memorialized in their records with a Form 
CG-3307 signed by the member. 
 

ALDIST 226/97, issued on September 30, 1997, authorized members to be paid 
an SRB if they reenlisted or extended their current enlistments between October 1, 1997, 
and March 31, 1998.  The members had to reenlist or extend their enlistments for terms 
of at least three years.  Xxs in Zone A were authorized to receive an SRB calculated with 
a multiple of 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: 
 

1. 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to section 1552 

 
6. 

 

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

2. 

The applicant alleged that he was not properly counseled about his eligi-
bility  to  receive  an  SRB  by  requesting  discharge  and  reenlistment  during  the  three 
months  prior  to  his  sixth  anniversary  on  active  duty.    He  alleged  that,  had  he  been 
properly  counseled,  he  would  have  reenlisted  for  six  years  to  receive  a  Zone  A  SRB 
with a multiple of one.  
 
 
Under  Enclosure  (3)  to  Commandant  Instruction  7220.33,  the  applicant 
had  a  right  to  be  counseled  concerning  SRBs  prior  to  his  sixth  anniversary  on  active 
duty.  There is no evidence that the Coast Guard counseled the applicant concerning his 
eligibility for an SRB during the three months prior to that date.  Had he been so coun-
seled, a Form CG-3307 should appear in his record, but there is none.   
  

3. 

4. 

Under Section 3.d.(9) of Enclosure (1) to the instruction, the applicant was 
eligible  to  be  discharged  on  November  12,  1997,  the  sixth  anniversary  of  his  original 
enlistment, and immediately reenlisted to qualify for a Zone A SRB.  However, at that 
time he had already obligated himself to serve through July 20, 1998.  
 

The  Chief  Counsel  recommended  that  the  Board  grant  the  applicant’s 
relief by correcting his record to show that on November 12, 1997, he reenlisted for a 
term  of  six  years.    However,  the  Chief  Counsel  noted  that  the  applicant  would  not 
receive an SRB for the full six years but only for the additional time to which he was 
obligating himself beyond the end of his previous reenlistment.  The applicant did not 
object to this provision. 

5. 

The Coast Guard erred by not properly counseling the applicant concern-
ing his eligibility for an SRB on the sixth anniversary of his entry into active duty.  Had 
he been properly counseled, the Board is convinced that he would have reenlisted for  a 
term  of  six  years  to  receive  an  SRB,  subject  to  reduction  for  the  remaining  obligated 
service  under  his  July  21,  1995,  reenlistment  contract.    The  Coast  Guard’s  error  has 
apparently caused him to receive an SRB with a smaller multiple and to miss altogether 
the opportunity to receive a Zone A SRB. 

7. 

Under Section 3.d.(1) of Enclosure (1) to the SRB instruction, the applicant 
will receive a Zone A SRB, rather than a Zone B SRB, under ALDIST 226/97 if the Board 
grants the requested relief and the applicant has not already received a Zone A SRB. 

Therefore, the applicant’s request should be granted. 

 
8. 
 
 

 
 

 

 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE NEXT PAGE]

The application for correction of the military record of XXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, 

ORDER 

 

is hereby granted as follows.   

 
His  record  shall  be  corrected  to  show  that  on  November  12,  1997,  he  was  dis-
charged and immediately reenlisted for a term of six years for the purpose of receiving 
an  SRB  in  accordance  with  ALDIST  226/97  and  Section  3.d.(1)  of  Enclosure  (1)  to 
COMDTINST 7220.33.  His reenlistment contract dated July 17, 1998, shall be null and 
void.   
 
The Coast Guard shall pay the applicant the amount due him as a result of this 
correction.    In  calculating  the  amount  due,  any  SRB  payments  he  has  received  as  a 
result of the now void July 17, 1998, reenlistment contract shall be deducted. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
Michael K. Nolan 

 
L. L. Sutter 

 

 
 
John A. Kern