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. 2003-086
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he would be eligible to receive a Zone B
selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) that he was promised. 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. While the
applicant’s reenlistment contract contains a promise of a Zone B SRB with a multiple of XX pursuant to
ALCOAST 329/02, he never received the bonus because he had previously received one. He asserted that
had he been properly counseled, he would have never signed a 6-year reenlistment for an SRB for which he
was ineligible.
On August 22, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board deny the
applicant’s request. 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. This correction would reinstate the applicant’s prior expiration of enlistment date of September 7,
2002.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning his
eligibility for an SRB. The Board finds, and the Chief Counsel admits, that the Coast Guard committed an
error by improperly counseling the applicant to reenlist for a Zone B SRB, when he had previously received
one. No one may receive more than one SRB per Zone. See COMDTINST 7220.33, Article 3.b.(6). The Board
further finds that had the applicant been properly counseled, in August 2002 he would have been allowed to
reenlist for 3, 4, 5, or 6 years, or be discharged expeditiously.
ORDER
The military record of XXX Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, xxx xx xxxx, USCG, shall be corrected to show that on
September 7, 2002, the date of his prior expiration of enlistment, he reenlisted for 3, 4, 5, or 6 years, at his
discretion. In the alternative, if the applicant chooses not to reenlist, he shall be expeditiously discharged
and an extension contract shall be created to cover his service from September 8, 2002 until the date of his
discharge. The applicant’s 6-year reenlistment contract signed on August 30, 2002 shall be null and void.
January 16, 2004
Date
Felisa C. Garmon
Julia Andrews
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...
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...
2003-028 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by canceling the six-year reenlistment contract he signed on September 13, 2002, in order to receive a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) pursuant to ALCOAST 329/02. He stated that because the applicant previously received a Zone B SRB, the Board should void the applicant’s September 13, 2002 reenlistment contract. The Chief Counsel admitted and the Board finds that the Coast Guard erred by advising...
They shall sign a page 7 service record entry, enclosure (3) outlining the effect that particular action has on their SRB entitlement.” Article 3.b. The Board finds that although the applicant would not have reenlisted for six years for an SRB he was not eligible for on October 9, 2001, he would have either been discharged or allowed to reenlist for three, four, five, or six years, notwithstanding his ineligibility to receive a Zone B SRB. Accordingly, the Board should deny the applicant’s...
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 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. 2002-021 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on November 17, 2000, instead of extending his enlistment on that day for six years to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) pursuant to ALCOAST 218/00. On May...
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,...
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...
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,...
This final decision, dated September 12, 2002 is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he was discharged, and immediately reenlisted for a period of six years on his tenth anniversary of military service1 for the purpose of receiving a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB). (1) of Enclosure (1) to the Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (Reenlistment Bonus Programs Administration) states that members with...
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...