DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2002-062 
 
  
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Deputy Chair: 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title 10 and section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  The application was dock-
eted on March 13, 2002, upon receipt of the applicant’s completed application. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated October 10, 2002, is signed by the three duly appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

The applicant asked the Board to void his enlistment contract in the Coast Guard 
or  to  order  the  Coast  Guard  to  pay  him  the  remainder  of  his  enlistment  bonus 
promptly.  He alleged that when he enlisted in the Coast Guard  on June 12, 2001,  he 
was  promised  a  bonus  of  $5,000.00,  with  half  due  upon  his  completion  of  recruit 
training and the other half due upon his completion of “A” school.  He alleged that this 
payment schedule was provided in Annex  T of his enlistment contract, but the Coast 
Guard failed to pay him the second half of his bonus on time.  Annex T reads as follows 
in pertinent part: 

 
Prior to enlisting in the United States Coast Guard and receiving an Enlistment Bonus, I, 
[applicant’s name], understand that: 
 
1. 
I  have  been  offered  an  Enlistment  Bonus  of  $5,000.00  to  affiliate  with  the  [tele-
communications] rating.  In order to affiliate with this rating, I have either been offered a 
Type  I  or  Type  II  guaranteed  school,  or  guaranteed  enrollment  to  an  eligible  “Striker” 
[on-the-job training] program, or I am a prior service member who is already qualified in 
the skill/rating in accordance with eligibility criteria established by the Coast Guard. 
 

I  agree  to  enlist  for  four  (4)  years  in  the  rating  for  which  the  bonus  is  paid.  
2. 
Therefore, if I am a prior service member with a qualifying skill or specialty, I will enlist 
in the eligible rating for at least four years or if I am a non-prior service member, I will be 
assigned to a Class “A” school or enrolled into a “Striker” program for the eligible rating 
identified above. 
 
3. 
When  the  total  Enlistment  Bonus  is  less  than  $7,000.00,  then  the  bonus  will  be 
paid in two (2) equal installments.  If I am a non-prior service member, the first install-
ment of the bonus will be paid after successful completion of recruit training Cape May, 
and the second installment will be paid upon successful completion of Class “A” school 
or placement on the Striker advancement eligibility list for eligible rating[s] that do not 
have an associated “A” school.  If I am a prior service member who already has the quali-
fying skill, the first installment will be paid upon entry into the Coast Guard and the sec-
ond installment will be paid after satisfactorily serving for six months in the designated 
rating. 
 
The  applicant  alleged  that,  although  he  had  prior  military  service  in  the  Navy 
when he enlisted in the Coast Guard, he did not have the qualifications or skills to be a 
telecommunications  specialist.    Therefore,  he  was  went  through  recruit  training  and 
“A” school like a non-prior service member, received the first installment of his bonus 
when he completed recruit training, and should have received the second installment of 
his bonus when he graduated from “A” school.  He submitted a copy of Annex D to his 
contract, which shows that he was enlisting under the “Type I guaranteed school pro-
gram” and was guaranteed an assignment to telecommunications “A” school.  

 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On August 5, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard submitted an advisory 
opinion  in  which  he  recommended  that  the  Board  deny  the  applicant’s  request.    He 
stated that, since the application had been filed, the applicant had been paid the second 
half of his bonus.  He stated that the applicant was paid the second installment upon 
completing six months’ satisfactory service in his rating, in accordance with Annex T, 
and that there is no basis for voiding his enlistment contract. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On August 7, 2002, the Chairman sent the applicant a copy of the views of the 

 
 
Coast Guard and invited him to respond within 15 days.  No response was received. 
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

 
 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the 
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submissions, and appli-
cable law: 
 

1. 

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

§ 1552.  The application was timely. 
 

2. 

Because it is incorporated into the applicant’s enlistment contract, Annex 
T controls the timing of the installment payments of his bonus.  Paragraph 1 of Annex T 
distinguishes between two categories of recruits:  (a) members enlisted under a Type I 
or Type II guaranteed school program or a guaranteed “Striker” program and (b) prior 
service members already qualified in their prospective skill or rating.   

 
3. 

The applicant clearly fell into the first category (category (a) in finding 2 
above) because Annex D of his contract shows that he enlisted under a Type I guaran-
teed school program.  The definition of category (a) in paragraph 1 of Annex T does not 
exclude prior service members, such as the applicant.   Moreover, although he had prior 
military service, he did not have the necessary qualifications to serve as telecommunica-
tions specialist at the time of his enlistment and therefore could not be a member of the 
second category (category (b) in finding 2). 

 
4. 

In  paying  the  applicant  the  first  installment  of  his  bonus  when  he  com-
pleted recruit training, instead of when he entered the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard 
apparently  treated  the  applicant  as  a  member  of  category  (a).    However,  in  delaying 
payment of the second installment until he had completed six months of service in his 
rating,  the  Coast  Guard  inconsistently  and  erroneously  treated  him  as  if  he  were  a 
member of category (b). 

 
5. 

The  Board  finds  that  the  Coast  Guard  owed  the  applicant  the  second 
installment of his enlistment bonus when he completed “A” school.  However, while his 
application  was  pending  before  the  Board,  he  completed  six  months  of  service  in  his 
rating and was paid the second installment.  Therefore, and because this Board has no 
authority  to  award  interest  on  delayed  payments,  the  applicant  is  not  entitled  to  any 
monetary relief. 

 
6. 

Although  the  Coast  Guard  erroneously  delayed  payment  of  the  second 
installment of the applicant’s bonus, the Board finds no reason to void his enlistment 
contract.  He did not allege or prove that he would not have enlisted if he had been told 
he  would  not  receive  the  second  installment  of  his  bonus  until  he  had  completed  six 
months of service in his rating. 

 
7. 

 
 
 

 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied.  

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

 
 
 

The application of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his military 

ORDER 

 

 
 

 
 

record is denied. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 Laura A. Aguilar 

 

 

 
 Stephen H. Barber 

 

 

 
 Angel Collaku