DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2000-107
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
ANDREWS, Attorney-Advisor:
On April 3, 2000, the applicant asked the Board to change the date of his 6-year reenlistment from
November 2, 1999, to February 1, 2000, his 6th active duty anniversary. In November 1999, the applicant
was required to extend his enlistment by at least 1 month to obligate sufficient service to accept transfer
orders. His record contains two entries indicating that he was advised that if he reenlisted for 6 years
prior to his 6th anniversary (while still in Zone A), he would receive a Zone B SRB. However, under
COMDTINST 7220.33, members must have completed at least 6 years of active duty to receive a Zone B
SRB. The applicant had already received a Zone A SRB and was ineligible for another. ALCOAST
184/99 authorized a Zone B SRB for members in the BM rating who reenlisted on or after January 1, 2000.
On November 7, 2000, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board correct
the applicant’s record to show that he extended his enlistment for 1 month on November 2, 1999, and
reenlisted for 6 years on February 1, 2000.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his eligi-
bility for a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 184/99. The record indicates that the Coast Guard erred by
failing to counsel him properly. If the applicant had been properly counseled, he would have extended
his enlistment for 1 month on November 2, 1999, and reenlisted for 6 years on February 1, 2000, to qualify
for a Zone B SRB. Accordingly, relief should be granted.
ORDER
The record of XXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, shall be corrected to show that he extended his
enlistment for 1 month on November 2, 1999, for OBLISERV but canceled that extension and reenlisted
for 6 years on February 1, 2000, for a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 184/99. The 6-year reenlistment
contract he signed on November 2, 1999, shall be null and void. The Coast Guard shall pay the applicant
the amount due him as a result of this correction.
January 4, 2001
Date
Stephen H. Barber
Donna L. O'Berry
Karen L. Petronis
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility under ALCOAST 184/99 and COMDTINST 7220.33 to receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) by reenlisting on that date. If the applicant had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for 6 years to receive the SRB. ORDER The military record of , USCG, shall be corrected to show that he reenlisted for 6 years on his 6th active duty anniversary, June 29, 2000, to receive an SRB under ALCOAST 184/99.
The Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. Under ALDIST 184/99, he was eligible to reenlist for 3, 4, 5, or 6 years to receive a Zone A SRB with a multiple of 3. If he had done so, he would not have been eligible to reenlist for 4 years on June 13, 2000, but he would have been eligible to reenlist on his 10th anniversary for a Zone B SRB with a multiple...
He stated that “if proper counseling was done, [the applicant] would have cancelled the two extensions from her commanding officer 1 According to the SRB regulation, a member must enlist or extend for a minimum of 36 months to receive an SRB. He further stated there is no requirement that the Coast Guard re- counsel its members about a subsequent ALCOAST announcing new SRB multiples. (3), states, in pertinent part, as follows: “Members with exactly 6 years active duty on the date of...
He was not eligible to receive the promised SRB because on the date his extension became operative (May 28, 2002), he had more than 6 years of active duty service. On November 29, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted for 3 years on his 6-year anniversary. The Board finds that the applicant was not properly counseled, and that if he had been, he would have extended his enlistment on April 20, 2000,...
He alleged that he was improperly counseled about his eligibility to extend his reenlistment within the 3 months prior to his 10th active duty anniversary (March 20, 2000) for a Zone B SRB. On March 14, 2000, the applicant was advised that he could receive a Zone B SRB by extending the 4-year reenlistment contact he signed on May 28, 1999, through May 27, 2003. He recommended that the Board grant relief by correcting the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted on March 14, 2000, for...
He alleged that if he had known about the requirement that he be in pay grade E-5 to receive a Zone B SRB, he would not have reenlisted for six years but would have 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, which is reflected in the multiple used to calculate the bonus. Coast Guard members in pay grade E-5 and...
The Chief Counsel contended that the Board should find that the Coast Guard had no duty to counsel the applicant regarding the potential effect of his April 30, 1997 reenlistment on future SRB eligibility. of the Personnel Manual provides that members who receive PCS orders must be counseled about obligated service requirements and sign a page 7 documenting that counseling. The Board finds that if the applicant had received proper counseling, as urged by the Chief Counsel, the required...
2001-008 Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: SUMMARY OF THE RECORD ANDREWS, Attorney-Advisor: The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years on May 1, 2000, his 10th anniversary on active duty. On March 7, 2001, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years on his 10th anniversary. ORDER The military record of, shall be corrected to...
On January 9, 2002, when he was already in Zone B, his command reenlisted him for 6 years based on the erroneous promise of a Zone A SRB. His record contains no entry documenting SRB counseling prior to his 6th anniversary. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant relief in this case because the January 9, 2002, contract is voidable since it was based on a false promise and because the applicant’s record includes no documentation of 6th anniversary SRB counseling.
This final decision, dated February 10, 2005, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by voiding his 4-year reenlistment contract dated May 11, 2000, and replacing it with a 4-year reenlistment contract dated February 8, 2000, to receive a 6th active duty anniversary1 Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).2 The applicant alleged that he was never counseled that he could reenlist on his 6th anniversary of active...