DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
 
                                                                                     BCMR Docket No. 2002-045 
 
XXXXXX, XXXXXX X. 
XXX XX XXXX, XXX 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
GARMON, 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 February 12, 2002, upon the 
receipt of the applicant’s request for correction. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 

This final decision, dated October 31, 2002, is signed by the three duly appointed 

 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST  

 

The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by canceling a six-
month extension agreement that was dated April 25, 2001, and placed in his record by 
his  former  command  but  was  not  signed  by  the  applicant.    The  applicant  asked  the 
Board to replace the six-month extension with a shorter one and to reenlist him for six 
years on his tenth active duty anniversary in order to receive a selective reenlistment 
bonus (SRB) under ALCOAST 198/01.   

 

APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS 

 
The  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  initially  unaware  that  his  former  command 
prepared a six-month extension agreement on April 25, 2001 for him to obligate service 
in  acceptance  of  permanent  change  of  station  (PCS)  transfer  orders,  and  thereafter, 
incorporated  the  unsigned  agreement  into  his  military  record.    In  support  of  his 
allegations,  he  submitted  a  copy  of  the  extension  agreement  that  indicated  a  new 

expiration  of  enlistment  (EOE)  date  as  January  9,  2002,  but  was  unsigned  by  the 
applicant.   

 
He  alleged  that  he  became  aware  of  the  extension  agreement  shortly  after 
reporting to his new unit in May 2001, but could not attempt to resolve the matter until 
after a three-month drydock period following the events of September 11, 2001.  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.   
 
 

SUMMARY OF  THE APPLICANT’S RECORD 

 
 
The applicant enlisted for four years in the Coast Guard on September 17, 1991, 
through  September  16,  1995.    On  April  10,  1995,  he  reenlisted  for  an  additional  four 
years, through April 9, 1999.  On March 4, 1996, he extended his enlistment for three 
months in order to accept PCS transfer orders.  As a result of this extension, his new 
EOE became July 9, 1999.  On June 21, 1999, the applicant extended his contract for two 
years, through July 9, 2001.  
 
 
On  March  25,  2001,  the  applicant’s  former  command  prepared  a  six-month 
extension agreement, presumably for the applicant’s signature to consent to obligating 
service  to  accept  PCS  transfer  orders.    Although  a  copy  of  the  unsigned  extension 
agreement could not be found in the applicant’s record, the applicant submitted a copy 
of the unsigned agreement, which indicated a new EOE date as January 9, 2002.  In May 
2001, the applicant reported to his new cutter.   
 

On  April  30,  2001,  the  Commandant  of  the  Coast  Guard  issued  ALCOAST 
198/01, which authorized short-term extensions for members whose enlistments ended 
and whose sixth and tenth active duty anniversaries fell between May 1 and October 1, 
2001,  so  that  those  members  could  reenlist  in  October  and  receive  an  SRB  as  though 
their actual anniversaries had fallen in October 2001.  ALCOAST 198/01 authorized a 
Zone B SRB calculated with a multiple of two for members in the XX rating.  There is no 
page  7  in  the  applicant’s  record  indicating  that  he  was  ever  counseled  about  this 
opportunity for an SRB.   
 

On January 8, 2002, the applicant signed an indefinite reenlistment contract.  To 

date, he continues to serve on active duty. 
 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On June 28, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the 

 
 
Board grant the applicant’s request. 
 
 
The  Chief  Counsel  conceded  that  the  applicant’s  command  improperly 
counseled  him  regarding  his  SRB  entitlement,  as  provided  in  ALCOAST  198/01.    He 
explained  that  the  applicant’s  record  supports  his  allegation  of  error.    The  Chief 
Counsel  further  stated  that  the  requested  relief  should  be  granted  as  the  applicant  is 
“willing to offer a new multiyear reenlistment contract as consideration for the SRB he 
seeks.”  He recommended that, the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he 
reenlisted on October 1, 2001 for a term of six years to qualify for a Zone B SRB.  
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On July 1, 2002, the Chairman sent a copy of the views of the Coast Guard to the 
applicant  and  invited  him  to  respond  within  15  days.    He  agreed  with  the  Coast 
Guard’s recommendation. 
 
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 
 Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6A) 
 
Article 4.B.6.a.2 of the Personnel Manual provides that “[p]ersonnel [serving in 
 
the grade of] E-4 and above with over six years of active duty [service] are considered to 
be in career status.  Unless otherwise indicated, they are required to have one year of 
OBLISERV [obligated service] remaining upon reporting to the new unit.” 
 
SRB Manual Provisions 

 
Article  3.d.(2)  of  Enclosure  (1)  to  the  Commandant  Instruction  7220.33 
(Reenlistment Bonus Programs Administration) provides that “[m]embers with exactly 
10 years active duty on the date of reenlistment or operative date of extension will be 
entitled to the Zone B multiple in effect for their rating if they are otherwise eligible.  If 
they have previously received a Zone B bonus or no Zone B bonus is designated, they 
are entitled to a Zone C bonus if one is in effect.“ 
 
 
Article  3.d.(9)  of  the  instruction  provides  that  “[c]ommanding  officers  are 
authorized to effect early discharge and reenlist members within 3 months prior to their 
6th,  10th,  or  14th  year  active  service  anniversary  dates  (not  to  be  confused  with  the 
normal expiration of enlistment), for the purpose of qualifying for a Zone A, B, or C SRB 
respectively.  …” 
 

On April 30, 2001, the Commandant issued ALCOAST 198/01, which provided 

 
the following: 
 

Commanding officers may authorize a short term extension up to 5 months to expire [no 
later  than]  31  October  2001  for  members  whose  6  or  10-year  anniversary  date  and 
expiration of enlistment date both fall on or after 1 May 2001 but before 1 October 2001.  
Upon the expiration of their short term extension, members must reenlist for a minimum 
of three years to receive the SRB. 

 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

1. 

2. 

The  Board  has  jurisdiction  concerning  this  matter  pursuant  to  10  U.S.C. 

 
 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the 
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submission, and appli-
cable law: 
 
 
§ 1552.  The application was timely. 
 
 
The  applicant  requested  that  the  six-month  extension  agreement,  dated 
April 25, 2001, be canceled because it was completed without his consent.  However, in 
the absence of an extension agreement with legal effect, the applicant’s records would 
erroneously reflect that he had a break in service from July 9, 2001, his prior EOE date, 
until January 8, 2002, the date he signed an indefinite reenlistment contract. To accept 
his  PCS  orders,  the  Coast  Guard  should  have  required  the  applicant  to  extend  his 
enlistment for long enough to have at least one full year at his new duty station, from 
May 2001 to May 2002.  Personnel Manual, Article 4.B.6.a.2.  Instead, the Coast Guard 
created a six-month contract and never had it executed by him.  Therefore, the Board 
finds  that  the  Coast  Guard  committed  an  error  in  treating  the  unsigned  extension 
agreement as formally binding the applicant, despite the Coast Guard’s failure to obtain 
his written consent. 
 
 
Under  COMDTINST  7220.33,  the  applicant  was  entitled  to  counseling 
concerning  his  eligibility  to  receive  a  Zone  B  SRB  under  ALCOAST  198/01  on 
September 17, 2001, his tenth active duty anniversary.  See Articles 3.d.(2) and 3.d.(9) of 
Enclosure  (1)  to  COMDTINST  7220.33.    ALCOAST  198/01  further  expanded  the 
provisions of ALCOAST 127/01 by providing for short-term extension waivers for SRB 
eligibility  based on a member’s tenth active duty anniversary date.  A Zone B SRB with 
a  multiple  of  two  was  available  under  ALCOAST  198/01  for  the  applicant’s  rating 
because both his ten-year anniversary date (July 9, 2001) and his EOE date (September 
17, 2001) fell between May 1, 2001 and October 1, 2001.  There is no page 7 entry in the 
applicant’s  military  record  showing  that  he  was  counseled  about  his  eligibility  for  a 
Zone  B  SRB  on  his  tenth-year  active  duty  anniversary.    Because  the  applicant  was 

3. 

eligible for this SRB, the applicant has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that 
the Coast Guard committed error by not counseling him about it. 
 
Furthermore, the applicant asserted that had he been properly counseled, 
 
he would have requested a short-term extension, then reenlisted in October of 2001 for a 
term of six years in order to obtain a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST 198/01.  In light of 
the fact that the applicant was eligible to receive the Zone B SRB, the Board finds that, if 
he had been properly counseled, he would have been granted a short-term extension, 
then  reenlisted  for  six  years  in  October  2001,  rather  than  executing  an  indefinite 
reenlistment on January 8, 2002.  
 
 
by a six-year reenlistment as provided under ALCOAST 198/01 should be granted.   
 
 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request for a short-term extension, followed 

4. 

5. 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

ORDER 

The  six-month  extension  agreement,  dated  April  25,  2001  but  unsigned  by  the 

His record shall reflect the reinstatement of his original expiration of enlistment 

The  indefinite  reenlistment  contract  that  he  signed  on  January  8,  2002  shall  be 

The application of XXX XXXXXX X. XXXXXX, XXX XX XXXX, USCG, is granted 

 
 
as follows:   
 
 
applicant, shall be void ab initio. 
 
 
null and void.   
 
 
date of July 9, 2001, from his June 21, 1999 extension. 
 
 
It  shall  further  reflect  that  he  extended  his  enlistment  again  for  three  months, 
through October 8, 2001, and then reenlisted on October 9, 2001 for six years.  The Coast 
Guard shall pay him the Zone B SRB he would be due under ALCOASTs 198/01 and 
127/01. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 Robert A. Monniere 

        

 
 Murray A. Bloom 

 

 

 
 Nancy Lynn Friedman