DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2000-187
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 4 years
on August 8, 2000, instead of June 29, 2000. He alleged that he was erroneously counseled that
he had to reenlist by the end of June to receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) under
ALCOAST 218/00. He later learned that the SRB did not go into effect until July 1, 2000, so he
received no SRB. The contract he signed on June 29, 2000, indicates that he was promised by
his command that he would receive an SRB for his reenlistment. He also submitted a letter
from his commanding officer in support of his allegations.
On January 29, 2001, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board
grant relief. He argued that if the applicant had been properly advised, he would likely have
waited until the last day of his then current enlistment, August 8, 2000, to reenlist.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling about his
eligibility for an SRB. His command erroneously advised him that he had to reenlist before July
1, 2000, to receive an SRB under ALCOAST 218/00. In fact, under ALCOAST 218/00, the SRB
for his rating went into effect on July 1, 2000. If he had been properly counseled, he would like-
ly have reenlisted on August 8, 2000, to receive the SRB. Accordingly, his request should be
granted.
The military record of XXXXXXXX, USCG, shall be corrected to show that he reenlisted
for 4 years on August 8, 2000, instead of June 29, 2000. The Coast Guard shall pay him the
amount due under ALCOAST 218/00 as a result of this correction.
ORDER
Angel Collaku
Donna L. O'Berry
June 14, 2001
Date
L. L. Sutter
He alleged that he was erroneously counseled that he could reenlist for only 3 years. His command erroneously advised him that he could reenlist for only 3 years when, in fact, he was eligible to reenlist for 6 years and receive an SRB with a multiple of 3 under ALCOAST 218/00. If he had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for 6 years on September 11, 2000, to receive the SRB.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: XXXXXX, XXXXXX X. XXX XX XXXX, XXX FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. 2002-021 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on November 17, 2000, instead of extending his enlistment on that day for six years to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) pursuant to ALCOAST 218/00. On May...
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...
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. However, his extension contract also states that he is eligible for an SRB under ALCOAST 218/00 and that his “SRB will be based on 32 months [of] newly obligated service.” The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation of erroneous...
Therefore, there was no authority in June 2000 for the applicant to cancel the two-year extension he had already signed and sign a much shorter extension that would enable him to reenlist in July 2000 for the higher SRB multiple. The applicant has not proved that, prior to the end of his enlistment on June 24, 2000, he should have been permitted to cancel his two-year extension to extend for an even shorter period so that he could reenlist in July 2000 and receive the higher SRB multiple...
This final decision, date May 22, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by canceling the reenlistment contract he signed on August 15, 2000 and reenlisting him for six years to obtain a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). On May 19, 2000, the Commandant of the Coast Guard issued ALCOAST 218/00, which authorized members in the XX rating in Zone A to receive an SRB with a multiple of one-half,...
In fact, throughout the four years during which the appli- cant was in Zone B, from March 5, 1997, through March 5, 2001, no Zone B SRB multiple was ever authorized for the MK rating.2 On July 16, 2001, after his command received notice that he was fit for full duty, the applicant was allowed to reenlist indefinitely in the Coast Guard. The applicant asked the Board to make certain corrections to his record so that, under ALCOAST 488/00, he would receive an SRB for a six-year...
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...
He stated that if the applicant “presented clear evidence indicating his command would have approved such a request in January 2001, the Coast Guard would consider withdrawing its recommendation to deny relief.” APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On June 3, 2002, the Chair sent a copy of the Coast Guard’s advisory opinion to the applicant and invited him to respond within 15 days. In the latter case, the Board granted relief only because the applicant’s performance...
This final decision, dated September 12, 2002 is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he was discharged, and immediately reenlisted for a period of six years on his tenth anniversary of military service1 for the purpose of receiving a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). (1) of Enclosure (1) to the Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (Reenlistment Bonus Programs Administration) states that members with...