DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
BCMR Docket
No. 2003-009
Application for Correction of
Coast Guard Record of:
Ulmer, Chair:
FINAL DECISION ON FURTHER CONSIDERATION
This is a further proceeding pursuant to section 1552 of title 10, United States Code.
This final decision on further consideration, dated December 18, 2003, is signed by the three
duly appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
ORIGINAL FINDINGS
On August 28, 2003, the Board considered Docket No. 2003-009 and found that the
applicant had been erroneously promised a Zone B SRB for a six-year reenlistment on March
30, 2001 for which he was not eligible because he was not serving in pay grade E-5 at the time
of reenlistment, as required under COMDTINST 7220.33. Therefore, the Chief Counsel
recommended alternative relief by allowing the applicant to void the March 30, 2001 six year
reenlistment contract and to elect either a discharge or a new (shorter) reenlistment period
under the provisions of Article 1.G. of the Personnel Manual. The Board did not order the
relief recommended by the Chief Counsel at the time it rendered the final decision because
the applicant did not communicate his agreement with the recommended relief. Although
the Board denied the applicant' s request for the Zone B SRB, it issued the following directive
to the applicant:
If the applicant desires the alternative relief recommended by the Chief Counsel
consisting of a discharge or a new enlistment/extension instead of the March
30, 2001 six-year reenlistment, he is directed to file a request with the Board
seeking such relief within 60 days from the date of this order.
FURTHR EVIDENCE SUBMITTED
On October 8, 2003, the Board received a communication from the applicant
requesting that the Board void his March 30, 2001 six-year reenlistment and replace it with a
one year extension under Article 1.G. of the Personnel Manual. In telephone conversations
with a member of the BCMR staff on November 20, 2003 and December 17, 2003, the
applicant clarified his request, by stating that he wanted to shorten the March 30, 2001, six-
year reenlistment to a four-year reenlistment.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. The Board has jurisdiction of the case pursuant to section 1552 of title 10, United
Upon further consideration, the Board makes the following findings and conclusions
on the basis of the submissions of the applicant and the Coast Guard, the military record of
the applicant, and applicable law:
States Code.
2. The Board determined in the original preceding that the Coast Guard committed an
error by erroneously promising the applicant a Zone B SRB for which he was not eligible
under the SRB regulation when he reenlisted on March 30, 2001. As alternative relief the
Coast Guard recommended that the applicant be allowed to void his March 30, 2001 six-year
reenlistment contract and permitted to reenlist for a new period as permitted under Article
1.G. of the Personnel Manual. The Board did not direct such relief in the final decision
because the applicant did not express his agreement with it. However the Board granted the
applicant sixty days from its original order to state whether he wanted to accept the relief
recommended by the Chief Counsel.
reenlistment be replaced with a four-year reenlistment.
4. In light of the Board's finding of error in the original proceeding, the Chief
Counsel's recommendation for relief, and input from the applicant, the Board finds that the
applicant's March 30, 2001, reenlistment shall be changed to a four-year reenlistment.
3. On December 17, 2003, the applicant requested that his March 30, 2001 six-year
ORDER
Upon further consideration, the military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG,
shall be corrected to show that he reenlisted for a period of four years, rather than six years,
on March 30, 2001.
Date
Julia Andrews
Felisa C. Garmon
Dorothy J. Ulmer
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...
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...
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...
This final decision, dated March 26, 2003, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board either to order the Coast Guard to pay him the selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) that he was promised on his last enlistment contract or to release him from the contract so that he would be discharged. He alleged that he would not have reenlisted but for the promise of the SRB. Goldberg v. Califano, 431 U.S. 937 (1977); Montilla v. United...
He alleged that when he reenlisted on August 30, 2002, he was improperly counseled that he would receive an SRB if he reenlisted for six years. He recommended that in the interest of justice, the applicant’s August 30, 2002 reenlistment contract be voided because it was based on the promise of an SRB that he was not eligible to receive. FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his eligibility for an SRB.
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.
2001-090 Application for Correction of Coast Guard Record of: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FINAL DECISION ULMER, Chair: The applicant, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on March 2, 2001, rather than March 1, 2001. The applicant disagreed that he had more 10 years of active duty on that date. He recommended that the Board grant alternative relief by correcting the applicant's...
CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2001-090
2001-090 Application for Correction of Coast Guard Record of: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx FINAL DECISION ULMER, Chair: The applicant, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on March 2, 2001, rather than March 1, 2001. The applicant disagreed that he had more 10 years of active duty on that date. He recommended that the Board grant alternative relief by correcting the applicant's...
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...
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: Final Decision BCMR No. 2002-138 May 30, 2003 Date SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked that his record be corrected in a manner that would permit him to receive the Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) that was promised to him when he reenlisted on December 11, 2001. However, correcting the applicant's record in the manner recommended by the...