Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-130
Original file (2002-130.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 
Application for Correction of  
Coast Guard Record of: 
 
 
 
    

 
 
 
BCMR Docket  
No.  2002-130 

  FINAL DECISION 

 
The  applicant  alleged  that  he  was  not  properly  counseled  about  the  selective  reenlistment 
bonus (SRB) available for the TC rating under ALCOAST 127/01 when he extended his enlistment for 
two years on July 6, 2001 to accept permanent change of station (PCS) orders.  The applicant extended 
his enlistment in middle of his original four-year enlistment that was set to expire on August 20, 2003, 
having previously extended his enlistment for two months.  The applicant was not eligible for an SRB 
until July 13, 2001, the date he was promoted to TC3.  He was informed on the extension agreement 
that there was no SRB available for him when he extended his enlistment.   
 

The  Chief  Counsel  of  the  Coast  Guard  admitted  that  the  applicant  might  not  have  been 
properly  counseled  and  recommended  that  the  Board  grant  relief  on  condition  that  the  applicant 
obtain a statement from his command attesting to this fact.  He noted the applicant must extend for a 
minimum period of 36 months to be eligible for an SRB.   
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

 
The Board finds that the applicant was not fully counseled about the opportunity of an SRB 
multiple  when  he  extended  his  enlistment  on  July  6,  2001.  In  reaching  this  conclusion,  the  Board 
notes that the extension agreement contains a provision advising the applicant that the SRB multiple 
available for him was  'NA" (not applicable), when in fact a multiple of 2 was authorized for the TC 
rating under ALCOAST 127/01.  The Board is satisfied that if the applicant had been fully counseled 
about this opportunity, he would have extended his enlistment on July 14, 2001, rather than July 6, 
2001, for at least 3 years to have the rate and time necessary to be eligible for the SRB.   
 

ORDER 

The military record of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX USCG, shall be corrected to show that he signed 
 
his extension contract on July 14, 2001, instead of July 6, 2001.  The term of this contract shall be 3, 4, 
5, or 6 years, at his discretion.  The two-month extension contract that he signed on March 15, 2001, 
shall  be  canceled  in  accordance  with  Art.  3.d.(6)  of  Encl.  (1)  to  COMDTINST  7220.33.    The  Coast 
Guard shall pay him the amount due under ALCOAST 127/01 as a result of this correction. 
 
 
 
 
 
Date 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 Felisa C. Garmon 

 
 
 Julia Andrews 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 
 Dorothy J. Ulmer 

 

 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-018

    Original file (2002-018.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated September 26, 2002, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by substituting the three-year extension agreement he signed on March 27, 2001, with a three-year extension agreement dated for May 2, 2001. of the Personnel Manual provides that members serving in a grade E-4 and above with fewer than six years of active duty may not accept PCS orders Final Decision in BCMR Docket No. The applicant extended his...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-045

    Original file (2002-045.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-062

    Original file (2004-062.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated September 23, 2004, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant reenlisted for six years on October 1, 2001, and was promised a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 1.5 under ALCOAST 127/01. According to the Coast Guard, the applicant did not have any of the authorized surfman qualification codes when he enlisted on October 1, 2001. contract showing that he was promised a Zone B SRB with a multiple 1.5. ORDER Derek A. Capizzi The...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-016

    Original file (2002-016.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant asserted that if he had not accepted the PCS orders he could have received a short-term extension under ALCOAST 198/01 from August 27th to September 30, 2001, and reenlisted on October 1, 2001, for an SRB multiple of 2. The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant had to have a minimum of one year of obligated service remaining in the Coast Guard upon reporting to his new unit. The Coast Guard could not have counseled the applicant on ALCOAST 198/01 because it was not issued...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2001-082

    Original file (2001-082.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Views of the Coast Guard On September 18, 2001, the Board received an advisory opinion from the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommending that the Board grant alternative relief in this case. The Chief Counsel stated there was no way for the applicant to satisfy the requirement to extend or reenlist for three years while at the same time preserving his opportunity for the Zone B SRB with a multiple of 2 that became effective on October 1, 2001. However, according to the Chief Counsel,...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-132

    Original file (2002-132.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, date May 22, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by canceling the reenlistment contract he signed on August 15, 2000 and reenlisting him for six years to obtain a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). On May 19, 2000, the Commandant of the Coast Guard issued ALCOAST 218/00, which authorized members in the XX rating in Zone A to receive an SRB with a multiple of one-half,...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-009

    Original file (2002-009.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-102

    Original file (2002-102.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2002-149

    Original file (2002-149.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not eligible to receive the promised SRB because on the date his extension became operative (May 28, 2002), he had more than 6 years of active duty service. On November 29, 2002, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted for 3 years on his 6-year anniversary. The Board finds that the applicant was not properly counseled, and that if he had been, he would have extended his enlistment on April 20, 2000,...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2003-037

    Original file (2003-037.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He alleged that on December 17, 2001, he was counseled that he was eligible to receive a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 127/01 but was never paid the SRB. On December 17, 2001, ALCOAST 127/01 was in effect and authorized a Zone A SRB with a multiple of xxxxx for members in the XX rating. Accordingly, the Board should grant relief by voiding the applicant’s four-year reenlistment contract, signed on May 24, 2002, and by offering him the opportunity to extend his original enlistment contract for 2 years.