DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
XXXXXX, XXXXXX X.
XXX XX XXXX, XXX
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2002-120
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years, rather
than for 4 years, on April 28, 2002, his 10th anniversary on active duty. He alleged that he was
erroneously advised that he would receive the maximum Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB),
pursuant to ALCOAST 585/01, if he reenlisted for 4 years. His record contains a page 7, dated March 4,
2002, which states that he could only reenlist or extend his enlistment for a maximum of 4 years when,
in fact, he could have reenlisted for 6 years. The page 7 also states that his SRB would be calculated
upon 48 months of newly obligated service. However, due to the remaining 24 months of obligated
service from his previous contract, the period of newly obligated service upon which the applicant’s
Zone B SRB was based was not 48 months, but rather only 24 months. He alleged that had he been
properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for 6 years in order for his SRB to be computed upon 48
months.
On November 29, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant
the applicant’s request because the record supports his allegations that but for the Coast Guard’s
erroneous counseling, the applicant would have reenlisted for the maximum of 6 years.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his
eligibility to reenlist for 6 years on his 10th anniversary. The Board finds that the applicant was
erroneously advised about the opportunity to receive the maximum Zone B SRB under ALCOAST
585/01 on his 10th active duty anniversary. The Board finds that, had he been properly counseled, he
would have reenlisted for 6 years instead of 4 years. Accordingly, relief should be granted.
ORDER
The application of XXX XXXXXX X. XXXXXX, XXX XX XXXX, USCG, for correction of his
military record is granted. His record shall be corrected to show that he reenlisted for 6 years instead of
4 years on April 28, 2002, his 10th active duty anniversary, to receive a Zone B SRB as provided under
ALCOAST 585/01. The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a result of this correction.
Date
Julia Andrews
Felisa C. Garmon
Dorothy J. Ulmer
On September 10, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard stated that although the record indicates that the applicant was a qualified boats coxswain and the page 7 entry was issued in error, granting the requested relief would not provide the applicant with an opportunity to obtain a Zone B SRB. He recommended that the Board grant alternative relief by correcting the applicant’s record to show that in accordance with ALCOAST 127/01, he reenlisted for six years on December 2, 2001, his...
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...
He also requested that the Board correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on April 11, 20xx, his sixth active duty anniversary, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). One of the petty officers wrote that, based on the applicant’s having four years’ prior active duty service in the Navy, he could have enlisted for two years, instead of four years but was erroneously advised by his recruiter at the time he enlisted in the Coast Guard. The applicant...
CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2003-025
He also requested that the Board correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on April 11, 20xx, his sixth active duty anniversary, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). One of the petty officers wrote that, based on the applicant’s having four years’ prior active duty service in the Navy, he could have enlisted for two years, instead of four years but was erroneously advised by his recruiter at the time he enlisted in the Coast Guard. The applicant...
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...
On December 12, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s requested relief because the record supports the applicant’s allegation that he was improperly counseled. The Chief Counsel admits and the Board finds that the Coast Guard committed an error when it promised the applicant a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 585/01 despite there being no multiple available therein for his rating. The Board is persuaded that had the applicant known that he was...
2002-152 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on May 7, 2002, his sixth active duty anniversary, to receive a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). He recommended that the Board grant relief by correcting the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted on May 7, 2002, for the purpose of receiving a Zone B SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 585/01. ORDER The military record of , USCG, shall be corrected to show that...
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,...
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: XXXXXX, XXXXXX X. XXX XX XXXX, XXX FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his eligibility to reenlist on his 10th active duty anniversary to receive an SRB under ALCOAST 127/01. Accordingly, relief should be granted by correcting his record to show that he...
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...