DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2002-116
ANDREWS, Deputy Chair:
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct the date of an extension contract in his
record from February 20, 2002 (when he was still a TC3), to April 2, 2002 (the day after
he was advanced to TC2), so that he would receive the Zone A selective reenlistment
bonus (SRB) that he earned for that contract based on the higher multiple that was in
effect for TC2s under ALCOAST 585/01. He alleged that he was miscounseled and that
if he had been properly counseled, he would have waited to sign the contract until after
he was advanced. He signed the contract upon receiving transfer orders that required
him to obligate additional service before accepting the orders and reporting to his new
unit in July 2002. Under paragraph 3.d(11) of Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33,
SRBs are based on the multiple in effect for a member’s rating on the day he signs a
reenlistment or extension contract. Under ALCOAST 585/01, which went into effect on
February 1, 2002, members with the rating TC3 were eligible for a Zone A SRB
calculated with a multiple of one, but the multiple for TC2s in Zone A was two.
The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant relief
because the record indicates that the applicant was awaiting advancement to TC2 in
February 2002 and did not need to sign his extension contract immediately in order to
accept the orders to transfer in July. The Chief Counsel stated that since the applicant
could have waited until April to sign the contract and accept the orders, the Board
should grant relief. He recommended that the Board void the February 20, 2002,
extension contract and allow the applicant to reenlist on April 2, 2002.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling
concerning his eligibility for an SRB. Although he apparently received some SRB
counseling, the record suggests that he was not properly informed that he could receive
twice as large an SRB if he waited a few weeks to sign the contract. In addition, the
record indicates that he could have waited to sign the contract because he was not
required to report to his new unit until July 2002. Accordingly, relief should be granted
by changing the date of the applicant’s extension contract or, as the Chief Counsel
recommended, allowing him to reenlist for a greater amount of time.
ORDER
The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to
show that he signed his 37-month extension contract on April 2, 2002, instead of on
February 20, 2002, and is entitled to the Zone A SRB calculated with a multiple of two in
effect for TC2s under ALCOAST 585/01. As an alternative, he shall be offered the
opportunity to reenlist for 5 or 6 years on April 2, 2002, for the SRB, and if he does
reenlist for 5 or 6 years as of that day, the 37-month extension contract shall be null and
void. To assist the applicant in making this decision, the Coast Guard shall fully
counsel him regarding his SRB eligibility under this order.
February 27, 2003
Date
John A. Kern
James G. Parks
Coleman R. Sachs
This final decision, dated June 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a full Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 based on his pay grade as an MK2, rather than a partial SRB reduced by previously obligated service under an extension contract. of the Personnel Manual provides that members with less than six years of active duty will not normally be...
He alleged that he was erroneously counseled that he would be able to reenlist after he was advanced to XXX, cancel his February 20, 2002 extension, and receive the Zone A SRB based on pay grade E-5. Although the applicant needed to obligate service to accept his orders to transfer in June 2002, the record indicates that he could have and with proper counseling should have waited to sign a contract until after his advancement to XXX to get a larger SRB. ORDER The military record of , USCG,...
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On April 25, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s request.2 The Chief Counsel stated that the “Coast Guard concedes that this Applicant met the eligibility criteria for an SRB at the time he reenlisted on 1 July, 2002.” The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant was eligible for the SRB because he “reenlisted within 3 months after the end of his enlistment/date after separation from active duty and...
This final decision, dated February 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he would receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for the full 72 months (six years) for which he reen- listed on July 18, 2002. 2002-098 p. 2 celed the extension contract, it would still count as previously obligated service and reduce his SRB by almost half: if he reenlisted in September 2002 before the...
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...
On May 30, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard stated that, if the applicant met the criteria for a Zone B SRB on the date of his sixth anniversary, the Board should grant the requested relief. The record indicates that the applicant met the criteria for a Zone B SRB on his sixth anniversary in that he was serving in pay grade E-5 and had not previously received a Zone B SRB. The Board further finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted on...
He alleged that, if he had been properly counseled, he would have cancelled his extension, prior to its operative date, and reenlisted for six years. On December 12, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard stated that the applicant’s request should be granted because the record shows that he was eligible for the SRB. The Board finds that the applicant was not properly counseled, and that if he had been, he would have cancelled the extension contract he signed on March 19, 2001 and...
This final decision, dated June 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 based on his pay grade as a BM1 and calculated with a multiple of two for the four-year reenlistment contract that he signed on June 12, 2002, upon receipt of transfer orders to a new unit. VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On December 23, 2002, the Chief...
This final decision, dated September 12, 2002, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by either ordering the Coast Guard to pay a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB), which was promised to him on August 18, 2001 for a six-year reenlistment under ALCOAST 127/01, or canceling the six-year reenlistment contract. The applicant did not receive the Zone A SRB because at the time of his reenlistment, he had served for 7 years and 8...
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...