Application for Correction of
Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket
No. 2002-097
FINAL DECISION
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
ULMER, Chair:
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by canceling the six year reenlistment contract he
signed on March 22, 2002 for which he was promised a Zone B SRB. The applicant stated that he reenlisted
because his command told him he was required to do so to have the necessary obligated service to qualify for
permanent change of station (PCS) orders. The Coast Guard refused to pay the SRB because the applicant had
enough remaining service on his original enlistment to qualify for new PCS Orders, without reenlisting or
extending.
The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant's command incorrectly advised him that he would receive
an SRB if he reenlisted on March 22, 2002. He recommended that the Board void the applicant's March 22, 2002
reenlistment contract and reinstate his extension of enlistment due to expire on May 26, 2003.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Board finds that the Coast Guard incorrectly advised the applicant about his eligibility for an SRB
and about the necessity for him to reenlist in order to have enough obligated service to accept PCS orders.
However at this point, it is not necessary to void the March 22, 2002, reenlistment contract. The applicant is
currently within three months of the expiration of his May 26, 2003 enlistment extension and he is therefore
eligible to reenlist. Accordingly, the March 22, 2002, contract should be corrected to show that the applicant
reenlisted for 5 or 6 years on March 22, 2003, for which he is eligible to receive a Zone B SRB under ALCOAST
329/02.
ORDER
The application of xxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his military record is granted. At his option,
the applicant's reenlistment contract dated March 22, 2002 shall be corrected to show that he reenlisted on
March 22, 2003 for 5 or 6 years. His record shall be further corrected to show that he is eligible to receive a Zone
B SRB under ALCOAST 329/02. The applicant's extension of enlistment due to expire on May 26, 2003 is
reinstated to cover the period from March 22, 2002 until the applicant's reenlistment pursuant to this Order. The
Coast Guard shall pay the applicant the amount that he is due as a result of this correction.
March 13, 2003
Date
Christopher A. Cook
Stephen H. Barber
Julia Andrews
Coast Guard members who have at least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A.” Members who have completed at least 6 years but no more than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Members may not receive more than one bonus per zone. On July 1, 1999, after receiving transfer orders to a new station, the applicant was advised that an SRB multiple was authorized for his rating and that if he reenlisted or extended his enlistment for at least three...
Coast Guard members who have at least 6 but no more than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. If the applicant had been properly counseled, it would be reasonable to assume that he would have extended for one (01) year to meet the obligated service requirement to accept his orders and prior to the effective date of the extension [July 11, 2003] he would have reenlisted for the Zone B SRB multiple of [2.5] that he was promised. The...
Coast Guard members who have at least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Coast Guard Personnel Manual Article 3.C.3 (Written Agreements) states that "all personnel with 10 years or less active service who reenlist or extend for any period, however brief, shall be counseled on the SRB program." However, when he reenlisted, he was incorrectly advised by Coast Guard personnel that he was...
The applicant alleged that when he signed a six-year extension contract on May 1, 2003, he was counseled that he would receive an SRB with a multiple of 2.5. The Board also finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled at the time of his May 1, 2003, reenlistment, he would have had the following options: Reenlist as he did for an SRB with a multiple of 2.0 under ALCOAST 329/02; a. b. c. Be discharged from the Coast Guard. of the Personnel Manual, and at the termination of said...
However, the Personnel Command denied the applicant’s request for an extension pursuant to COMDINST 7220.33.2 The applicant also alleged that if evidence of his successful completion of the Navigation Rules examination (NAVRULS) had been placed in his military record prior to his reenlistment, then he would have been eligible for an SRB multiple of 2 under ALCOAST 182/03. If the applicant had been told on April 29, 2003, that his request for a one- month extension was denied, he would have...
Subsequent to reporting to the new duty station, the applicant was informed by Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) that he was not eligible for the SRB because according to Article 4.B.6.a.2. of the Personnel Manual, he already had three years of service remaining on his then enlistment (apparently CGPC used the date the orders were issued rather than the date the applicant was due to report to his new duty station in calculating the three year requirement). FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The...
By that time, ALCOAST 182/03 was in effect and the SRB multiple for MK2s in Zone A was just 1.5.5 In support of his allegations, the applicant pointed out that his command failed to have him sign a CG-3307 (“page 7”) to acknowledge receiving proper SRB counseling when he signed the one-year extension contract on November 18, 2002. Therefore, the Board finds that the applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he was miscounseled in November 2002 that, if he extended...
Coast Guard members who have less than 6 of active duty service are in “Zone A.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. TJAG stated that in an effort to afford the applicant a result that most closely represents the bargain she claimed, the Coast Guard recommended that the Board offer her two options: First, Applicant could have her record corrected by voiding her reenlistment contract dated 3 June 2003 and subsequently extending her period of service until the BCMR final decision. ...
This final decision, dated November 12, 2004, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is entitled to a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 3.5, instead of the multiple of 2.5 that he received for signing a six-year reenlistment contract on March 21, 2004. When he executed the extension contract, the applicant was counseled that he was eligible to receive a Zone B SRB with...
This final decision, dated October 13, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he was entitled to a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 1.5, instead of the multiple of 1 which he received for signing a four-year extension contract on April 25, 2003. However, this ALCOAST was not in effect on the day the applicant signed the extension contract. Article 3.C.6...