DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2003-027
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for 6 years
instead of 4 on July 25, 2002. He alleged that he was miscounseled about the effect his
previously obligated service would have on the selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) he received
for the contract. He alleged that he thought that since he had 2 more years remaining on his
previous contract, a 4-year reenlistment would get him an SRB based on 6 years of service. In
support of his allegation, he submitted a signed statement from a fellow petty officer, who
indicated that the applicant had intended to get the maximum possible bonus by reenlisting but
misunderstood the regulations. The applicant’s record contains a form CG-3307 that he signed,
acknowledging that he was eligible to reenlist or extend his enlistment for up to 6 years and
that his SRB would be based on 48 months of newly obligated service.
The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli-
cant’s request because the record indicates that the applicant was confused about the regula-
tions and that his PERSRU failed to explain the impact of reenlisting for 4 years instead of 6.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, members are entitled to proper SRB counseling whenever
they reenlist. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that the applicant received inade-
quate counseling about how to get the maximum SRB for which he was eligible. The Board
finds that, if he had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for 6 years instead of 4.
Accordingly, relief should be granted.
ORDER
The military record of BM1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to
show that he reenlisted for 6 years (instead of 4) on July 25, 2002, for a Zone B SRB in accor-
dance with ALCOAST 329/02. The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a result of
this correction.
July 22, 2002
Date
Felisa C. Garmon
Julia Andrews
Dorothy J. Ulmer
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...
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 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 November 17, 2005, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by replacing his six- year reenlistment contract with a six-year extension contract so that he will receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 calculated with 72 months of newly obli- gated service instead of 52 months. Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33 states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member must...
CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2006-124-TechAmend
The JAG also stated that the applicant was legally entitled to the remaining Zone B SRB payments for his 1998 reenlistment although the SRB regulations did not expressly address the unusual circumstances of the applicant’s case.3 The JAG recommended that the Board void the 2002 contract; reinstate the June 15, 1998, contract to make the applicant eligible for further SRB installments for his service from October 26, 2002, through June 14, 2004; and enter an indefinite reenlistment contract...
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: FINAL DECISION BCMR Docket No. However, his extension contract also states that he is eligible for an SRB under ALCOAST 218/00 and that his “SRB will be based on 32 months [of] newly obligated service.” The Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the appli- cant’s request because the record supports his allegation of erroneous...
His record also contains a Page 7 documenting SRB counseling on April 15, 2009, and stating that he would receive an SRB based on 22 months of newly obligated service as a result of reenlisting for 4 years. The Page 7 also states that he was eligible to reenlist or extend his enlistment “for a maximum of 4 years.” The signatures on the reenlistment contract are dated April 15, 2009, but the typed date of reenlistment on the front page is July 12, 2011. In response to the JAG’s...
This final decision, dated December 29, 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 Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with seventy-two months of newly obligated service.1 He alleged that he was miscounseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that if he had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for six years on May 13, 2003, in lieu of extending, to...
The Board notes that the JAG alleged that the applicant should also have been advised of his Zone A SRB eligibility on his 6th anniversary, April 28, 2009, pursuant to Article 3.C.9. There is no Page 7 in the applicant’s record documenting SRB counseling on his 6th anniversary, but since he had already extended his enlistment through February 26, 2016, to receive a Zone B SRB and so could not reenlist for just 6 years, through April 27, 2015, to receive a Zone A SRB, he was not actually...
However, instead of receiving an SRB calculated on all six years of the contract, he received an SRB based on only three years, because the canceled extension contract constituted previously obligated service that counted against number of years of newly obligated service on which his SRB was based. Article 2 of Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (the SRB Instruction) provides that “[a]ll personnel with 14 years or less active service who reenlist or extend for any period, however brief, shall...