DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2002-050
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years
on October 31, 2001, instead of June 6, 2001. He alleged that he was erroneously advised that
he would receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) if he reenlisted on June 6, 2001.
The contract he signed shows that he was promised an SRB in consideration for his reenlist-
ment. However, under ALCOAST 127/01, no SRB was authorized for his rating until October
2001. In addition, the applicant’s 6th active duty anniversary fell on August 22, 2001. Under
COMDTINST 7220.33 and ALCOAST 198/01, a member whose 6th anniversary fell between
May 1 and September 30, 2001, was entitled to reenlist during October 2001 for a Zone A SRB.
The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli-
cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not properly counseled
and that if he had been, he would have waited until October 2001 to reenlist.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling
concerning his eligibility for an SRB. Under ALCOAST 127/01 and the special provisions of
ALCOAST 198/01, he was eligible to reenlist for a Zone A SRB on October 31, 2001, even
though his 6th active duty anniversary (normally the end of Zone A) was August 22, 2001. He
has proved that he was not properly counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reen-
listed for 6 years on October 31, 2001, for the SRB. In addition, he would have cancelled a 1-
year extension contract that he signed on October 20, 1999, which would have extended his
enlistment from November 22, 2001, to November 21, 2002. Accordingly, relief should be
granted.
ORDER
The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show
that on October 31, 2001, he reenlisted for 6 years to receive a 6th anniversary Zone A SRB as
provided under ALCOASTs 198/01 and 127/01. The reenlistment contract he signed on June 6,
2001, and the 1-year extension contract he signed on October 20, 1999, shall be null and void.
The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a result of this correction.
September 12, 2002
Date
Michael K. Nolan
Sherri L. Pappas
Dorothy J. Ulmer
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...
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. Under ALCOAST 198/01, members whose 6th or 10th anniversaries fell between May 1 and September 30, 2001, were permitted to reenlist in October 2001, to receive an SRB as if their actual anniversary had been in October 2001. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant...
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. His record does not contain documentation of SRB counseling prior to his 10th anniversary, and a letter signed by his supervisor states that he was not counseled about his eligibility. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not properly counseled.
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. ORDER The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show that on October 31, 2001, he reenlisted for 6 years to receive a 10th anniversary Zone B SRB as provided under...
He alleged that he was never counseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted for 6 years. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. The Board finds that he was not timely counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted for 6 years to receive the SRB.
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...
The Coast Guard erred when it counseled the applicant that he was eligible to receive a Zone B SRB for signing a six-year reenlistment contract on January 31, 2002. of the Personnel Manual, which show that a member’s SRB equals his monthly basic pay, multiplied by the SRB multiple authorized under the ALCOAST in effect, multiplied the number of months of service newly obligated under the contract, and divided by 12, if the appli- cant had reenlisted for four years on this 6th anniversary...
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: Xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation that he was not timely counseled. The Board finds that he was not timely counseled and that, if he had been, he would have reenlisted to receive the SRB.
The applicant argued that if ALCOAST 198/01 had been issued before he reenlisted on April 9, 2001, he would have elected to sign a short- term extension and reenlist in October 2001, at the E-7 pay grade to get a bigger SRB. VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On October 29, 2001, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request. The Chief Counsel argued that the record indicates that the applicant purpose- fully chose to reenlist on April 9, 2001, three...
This final decision, dated April 5, 2006, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he will be entitled to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for reenlisting on his sixth active duty anniversary in May 2001 and a Zone B SRB for reenlisting on his tenth active duty anniversary in May 2005.1 The applicant alleged that he was eligible for a Zone A SRB when he extended his original...