DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2000-027 
 
 
   

 

 
 

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 November 30, 1999, follow-
ing the BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s completed application. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  November  16,  2000,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant, a xxxxxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board 
to correct his military record to show that, in 1982, he extended his enlistment for six 
years  so  that  he  could  receive  a  Zone  A  Selective  Reenlistment  Bonus  (SRB)1  with  a 
multiple of 4, pursuant to ALDISTs 340/81 and 004/82.   
 

The applicant alleged that he was never counseled in 1982 about his eligibility to 
receive  an  SRB  under  ALDISTs  340/81  and  004/82.    He  alleged  that,  if  he  had  been 
counseled, he would have decided to reenlist for six years on June 14, 1985,2 to receive 
the maximum possible bonus because he always intended to make a career in the Coast 

                                                 
1  SRBs  vary  according  to  the  length  of  each  member’s  active  duty  service,  the  length  of  the  period  of 
reenlistment or extension of enlistment, and the need of the Coast Guard for personnel with the member’s 
particular skills.  Coast Guard members who have more than 21 months but less than 6 years of active 
duty service are in “Zone A.”  Members may not receive more than one bonus per zone. 
2    Because  the  applicant  was  not  eligible  to  reenlist  in  1982,  the  Board  interprets  his  statement  as  an 
allegation that if he had been counseled about the ALDISTs, he would have extended his enlistment in 
1982 for six years from June 16, 1985, to June 15, 1991. 

Guard.  The applicant stated that he did not discover his eligibility for this SRB until the 
executive officer at his current unit told him about the ALDISTs in September 1999. 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD AND REGULATIONS 

 

 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard as a seaman recruit on June 16, 1981, 
for a term of four years.  He was promoted to xxxxxx; pay grade E-2) in August 1981 
and to xxxxxxx pay grade E-3) in October 1982.  He was promoted to xxx (pay grade E-
4) in July 1983.  On June 14, 1985, he reenlisted for a second term of four years.  On June 
14,  1989,  he  reenlisted  for  a  third  term  of  four  years.    Although  there  are  no  further 
reenlistment  or  extension  contracts  in  the  applicant’s  paper  military  record,  he 
apparently remains on active duty.  There is no documentation of SRB counseling in his 
record prior to 1989. 
 

 
On    October  1,  1981,  the  Commandant  of  the  Coast  Guard  issued  ALDIST 
340/81, which allowed members within 30 days of the end of their enlistment periods to 
receive an SRB if they reenlisted or extended their current enlistments for at least three 
years.  The Zone A SRBs authorized for members in the xx rating who extended their 
enlistments or reenlisted under ALDIST 340/81 were calculated with a multiple of four.  
On January 12, 1982, ALDIST 004/82 temporarily locked in the multiples issued under 
ALDIST 340/81 and waived the requirement that members be within 30 days of the end 
of their enlistment periods in order to be eligible to receive the SRB for extending their 
enlistments.    To  take  advantage  of  ALDIST  004/82,  members  had  to  extend  their 
enlistments before February 15, 1982. 
 

Commandant  Instruction  7220.13E  (Administration  of  the  Reenlistment  Bonus 
Program)  was  released  on  May  4,  1979,  and  was  in  effect  when  ALDIST  340/81  and 
ALDIST 004/82 were issued.  Article 1.d.(1) provided the criteria for SRB eligibility in 
Zone A.  The first criterion listed is that the member “[b]e serving on active duty in pay 
grade  E-3  or  higher  in  a  military  specialty  designated  [in  the  ALDIST].”    The  Coast 
Guard was required to counsel members who were eligible for an SRB.  See COMDT-
INST  7220.13E,  Enclosure  (1),  Article  1.g.,  and  the  Decision  of  the  Deputy  General 
Counsel in BCMR Docket No. 93-121 (holding that Coast Guard regulations require that 
eligible members be “fully informed” that they may reenlist or extend their enlistments 
to receive SRBs). 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On June 29, 2000, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard issued an advisory opin-
ion  recommending  that  the  Board  deny  the  applicant’s  request.    He  stated  that  the 
applicant was ineligible for an SRB under ALDIST 004/82 because he was in pay grade 

E-2  when  it  was  in  effect.    Under  Article  3.C.a.(4)3  of  the  SRB  Instruction,  he  stated, 
members must be in pay grade E-3 or above to be eligible to receive an SRB.  Moreover, 
the  Chief  Counsel  argued,  there  was  no  SRB  in  effect  for  members  in  the  xx  rating 
during the three months prior to the end of his first enlistment on June 15, 1985.   

 

                                                 
3 The Chief Counsel cited an article in the SRB Instruction issued in 1988 (COMDTINST 7220.33).  How-
ever,  that  article  is  substantially  the  same  as  Article  1.d.(1)  of  Enclosure  (1)  to  COMDTINST  7220.13E, 
which was in effect in 1982. 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On June 30, 2000, the Chairman sent the applicant a copy of the Chief Counsel’s 
advisory opinion and invited him to respond within 15 days.  The applicant requested 
and  was  granted  a  45-day  extension  of  the  time  to  respond  on  July  15,  2000,  but  the 
Board never received a response.   

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 over this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552. 

2. 

Under  ALDIST  004/82,  from  January  12  to  February  14,  1982,  members 
could  extend  their  enlistments  to  receive  an  SRB  even  if  they  were  not  within  thirty 
days  of  the  ends  of  their  enlistments.    However,  ALDIST  004/82  did  not  repeal  the 
other eligibility criteria for an SRB contained in COMDTINST 7220.13E.  One of those 
criteria, listed in Article 1.d.(1) of Enclosure (1) to the instruction, was that the member 
be in pay grade E-3 or above.  The applicant was in pay grade E-2, which is below E-3, 
while ALDIST 004/82 was in effect.   

Although the applicant was advanced to pay grade E-3 by the time any 
extension he might have signed in February 1982 would have gone into effect, this does 
not mean that in February 1982 he would have been permitted to sign an extension con-
tract based on the possibility that he might be advanced before the extension became 
operative.    Neither  ALDIST  004/82  nor  COMDTINST  7220.13E  contained  any  provi-
sions for allowing members to extend their enlistments on the chance that they might 
have  met  the  eligibility  criteria  by  the  time  their  extensions  became  operative.    This 
finding—that  the  applicant  had  to  be  in  pay  grade  E-3  or  above  while  the  ALDIST 
authorizing  the  SRB  was  in  effect—is  consistent  with  the  Board’s  decisions  in  BCMR 
Docket Nos. 2000-012, 1999-177, 1999-166, and 1999-056.  
 

Because the applicant was in pay grade E-2 while ALDIST 004/82 was in 
effect, he was ineligible for the SRB authorized by the ALDIST.  Therefore, the Coast 
Guard’s failure to counsel him about the ALDIST was not an error or an injustice. 

4. 

 

 
3. 

 
5. 

 

 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied.  

 
 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

 
 

 

ORDER 

The  application  of  XXXXXXXX,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his  military  record  is 

hereby denied. 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 

 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 

 
Robert C. Ashby 

 

 

 

 
Edmund T. Sommer, Jr. 

 

 

 

 
Mark A. Tomicich