DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2001-130
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Ulmer, Chair:
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant extended his enlistment on May 8, 2001 for 21 months to have enough
service to accept permanent change of station (PCS) orders. He asked the Board to correct his
record to show that he extended this enlistment for a minimum of three years prior to April 30,
2001 rather than having done so on May 8, 2001. This correction will allow the applicant to be
eligible for a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 127/01. The applicant claimed that he was not
counseled in a timely manner about this SRB opportunity. The multiple for his rate was
canceled effective May 1, 2001, which was published in ALCOAST 127/01 on March 27, 2001.
On February 11, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the
Board grant the applicant’s request. He stated that the applicant had not established that the
Coast Guard committed error. He did find, however, the applicant had suffered an injustice
under the circumstances of this case. He stated there is no doubt that the applicant could and
would have extended his enlistment for a minimum of three years prior to April 30, 2001, if he
had been informed about ALCOAST 127/01. The applicant agreed with the Chief Counsel’s
recommendation.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling about
ALCOAST 127/01 at the time it was issued. The failure to counsel the applicant about this
ALCOAST, prior to May 8, 2001, left him uninformed that the SRB multiple would change from
.5 to 0, effective May 1, 2001. If the applicant had known about ALCOAST 127/01 earlier, he
could and would have taken advantage of the SRB available for his rate. Accordingly, relief
should be granted.
ORDER
The military record of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX USCG, shall be corrected to show
that he reenlisted on April 27, 2001, for at least three years, for a Zone A SRB with a multiple of
.5, pursuant to ALCOAST 127/01. The applicant is authorized to enlist for a longer period, if
he so desires. The Coast Guard shall pay the applicant the amount he is due as a result of this
correction.
July 3, 2002
Date
Barbara Betsock
Charles Medalen
Thomas A. Phemister
The applicant asserted that if he had not accepted the PCS orders he could have received a short-term extension under ALCOAST 198/01 from August 27th to September 30, 2001, and reenlisted on October 1, 2001, for an SRB multiple of 2. The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant had to have a minimum of one year of obligated service remaining in the Coast Guard upon reporting to his new unit. The Coast Guard could not have counseled the applicant on ALCOAST 198/01 because it was not issued...
This final decision, dated September 26, 2002, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by substituting the three-year extension agreement he signed on March 27, 2001, with a three-year extension agreement dated for May 2, 2001. of the Personnel Manual provides that members serving in a grade E-4 and above with fewer than six years of active duty may not accept PCS orders Final Decision in BCMR Docket No. The applicant extended his...
This final decision, dated September 12, 2002, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by either ordering the Coast Guard to pay a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB), which was promised to him on August 18, 2001 for a six-year reenlistment under ALCOAST 127/01, or canceling the six-year reenlistment contract. The applicant did not receive the Zone A SRB because at the time of his reenlistment, he had served for 7 years and 8...
Views of the Coast Guard On September 18, 2001, the Board received an advisory opinion from the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommending that the Board grant alternative relief in this case. The Chief Counsel stated there was no way for the applicant to satisfy the requirement to extend or reenlist for three years while at the same time preserving his opportunity for the Zone B SRB with a multiple of 2 that became effective on October 1, 2001. However, according to the Chief Counsel,...
He alleged that on December 17, 2001, he was counseled that he was eligible to receive a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 127/01 but was never paid the SRB. On December 17, 2001, ALCOAST 127/01 was in effect and authorized a Zone A SRB with a multiple of xxxxx for members in the XX rating. Accordingly, the Board should grant relief by voiding the applicant’s four-year reenlistment contract, signed on May 24, 2002, and by offering him the opportunity to extend his original enlistment contract for 2 years.
He also alleged that during this time, he was away from his servicing personnel reporting unit (PERSRU) and did not receive counseling about his eligibility to reenlist for an SRB on September 17, 2001, his tenth anniversary on active duty. The applicant alleged that, had he been counseled, he would have reenlisted for six years in order to obtain a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 198/01. [ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] ORDER The six-month extension agreement, dated April 25, 2001 but...
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,...
He alleged that pursuant to Coast Guard regulations, his command should have counseled him that he could receive a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 127/01 by reenlisting during the three months prior to January 22, 20xx, his sixth active duty anniversary. The CWO wrote that if the applicant had been aware that he could have reenlisted three months prior to his six-year anniversary, “he would receive an SRB payment, regardless of his selection to [xxxxxx xxxxxx].” The applicant also submitted a...
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,...
2001-106 Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years prior to May 1, 2001, so that he would be eligible to receive an SRB (selective reenlistment bonus) with a multiple of 5 pursuant to ALCOAST 488/00. On November 16, 2001, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s request. If the applicant...