Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-019
Original file (2002-019.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
 
 
BCMR Docket  
No.  2002-019 

 
 
Application for Correction of  
Coast Guard Record of: 
 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
 
    
Ulmer, Chair: 
 

 

 

 

  FINAL DECISION 

 
 
The  applicant,  a  member  of  the  Reserve,  asked  that  he  “be  compensated  for  a  reenlistment 
bonus [he] never received.”  He stated that he reenlisted in the Reserve for six years on June 7, 1997, 
and was entitled to a Reserve Enlistment Bonus [REB] pursuant to ALDIST 170/97. 
 

On May 22, 2002, the Chief Counsel recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request 
for relief because there was no REB available for the applicant on the date of his reenlistment in the 
Reserve.  In fact ALDIST 170/97 was not issued until July 21, 1997, approximately one month after 
the  applicant  reenlisted.  This  ALDIST  did  not  contain  a  provision  for  retroactivity.    Therefore,  the 
Chief  Counsel  stated  that  ALDIST  170/97  did  not  apply  to  the  applicant.    The  applicant  did  not 
submit a reply to the advisory opinion.   
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

 
The  Board  finds  that  the  applicant  has  failed  to  prove  that  the  Coast  Guard  committed  an 
error  or  injustice  by  refusing  to  award  him  a  REB.    ALDIST  170/97  was  not  applicable  to  the 
applicant  because  it  was  issued  after  the  applicant’s  reenlistment  date  and  it  did  not  contain  a 
provision for retroactivity.  Moreover, the Board is not aware of any REB that was available for the 
applicant at the time of his reenlistment.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied.   
 

ORDER 

The  application  of  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  USCGR,  for  the  correction  of  his  military 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
Christopher A. Cook  

 

 

 
Karen L. Petronis  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
record is denied. 
 
 
 
 
August 15, 2002  
Date 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
Kathryn Sinniger  

 

 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1997-062

    Original file (1997-062.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Chief Counsel also argued that, even if the Board found that the Coast Guard had erred and that the applicant would have extended his service if he had been counseled, the Board should still deny relief because, under the Supreme Court’s deci- 3 Although there are records for only two extensions prior to the applicant’s reenlistment on July 5, 1987, the applicant must have extended his first enlistment three times. Based on the applicant’s allegations, his military record, and the views...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1998-045

    Original file (1998-045.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS The applicant signed a form to extend his enlistment on September 28, 1997. On September 30, 1997, the Commandant of the Coast Guard issued ALDIST 226/97, 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 between October 1, 1997, and March 31, 1998. The chief yeoman also stated that, after ALDIST 226/97 was issued, she asked the PERSRU to prepare paperwork that would...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1997-123

    Original file (1997-123.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant in BCMR 54-97 enlisted in the Coast Guard for four years in 19xx and thereupon reenlisted for three years. The applicant in BCMR 69-97 enlisted in the Coast Guard in 19xx for four years and in 1980 reenlisted for six years. The Coast Guard has retained him for the six-year period, and, to quote the Deputy General Counsel in Dockets 54-97 and 69-97, “that is a sufficient basis on which to conclude that Coast Guard would have retained applicant for six years if he had obligated...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1999-058

    Original file (1999-058.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated November 18, 1999, is signed by the three duly RELIEF REQUESTED DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. The Chief Counsel further stated that the applicant knowingly extended his enlistment for six years to receive an SRB based on his additional obligated service. After ALDIST 135/97 became effective on July 1, 1997, the applicant was eligible to receive an...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1999-154

    Original file (1999-154.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    1999-154 The applicant, a xxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board to make him eligible for a Zone A Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB)1 pursuant to ALDIST 226/97 by correcting his record to show that on June 23, 1997, he extended his enlistment for the minimum of two years, rather than reenlisting for three years, and that he later cancelled this extension to reenlist for six years after the SRB became effective on October 1, 1997. He alleged that he was “led to believe...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1998-064

    Original file (1998-064.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In fact, under the terms of ALDIST 135/97, he was eligible to cancel his extension and reenlist on July 1, 1997, to receive the Zone A SRB.1 By the time he discovered the error, on December 12, 1997, it was too late 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. VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On January 12, 1999, the...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2000-122

    Original file (2000-122.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant asked the BCMR to correct his record to show that he extended his enlistment for a period of six years on February 14, 1982, in order to receive a Zone B SRB. However, the Deputy General Counsel has determined that the Coast Guard had no duty to counsel members in Zone A that under ALDIST 004/82 they might also be eligible for a Zone B SRB if they extended their enlistments twice. Thus, the Board finds that the Coast Guard had a duty to counsel the applicant about his...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1998-102

    Original file (1998-102.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, he stated that the Coast Guard recommended relief because the applicant’s agreement to obligate himself for another two years of service would provide the Service with “the necessary consid- eration for the Level II Bonus he now seeks.” Furthermore, the Chief Counsel stated that the applicant’s record supports his claim that he would have reenlisted for 6 years on May 22, 1998, had he known of the bonus opportunity. (3) of the Personnel Manual provides that during a member’s...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 1999-022

    Original file (1999-022.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated September 9, 1999, is signed by the three duly RELIEF REQUESTED The applicant, a xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board to correct his military record to show that, in 1982, he extended his enlistment so that he could receive a Zone B Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) pursuant to ALDISTs 340/81 and 004/82. Thus, the Board finds that the Coast Guard did have a duty to coun- sel the applicant about his eligibility for an SRB by...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2000-006

    Original file (2000-006.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated July 26, 2000, is signed by the three duly RELIEF REQUESTED The applicant, a xxxxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board to correct his military record to show that he reenlisted on February 1, 1996, for a term of 4 years. APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS The applicant alleged that, pursuant to Coast Guard regulations, he should have been counseled concerning his eligibility for an SRB during the three months prior to 1 SRBs vary according to the length of...