DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2004-062 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ULMER, Chair: 
 
 
This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section 
425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  It was docketed on January 26, 2004, upon the 
BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s completed application. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

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.    However,  he  was  paid 
only  a  multiple  of  1.  He  asked  the  Board  to  direct  the  Coast  Guard  to  pay  him  the 
additional  .5  multiple.      In  the  alternative,  he  asked  for  "reenlistment  in  Zone  B  per 
ALCOAST 182/03."  
 
 
ALCOAST 127/01 authorized a multiple of 1 for BM1s, plus an additional .5 for 
having  at  least  one  of  the  authorized  surfman  qualification  codes.    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.  
 

In support of his allegation, the applicant submitted a copy of his reenlistment 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 

 
On January 19, 1993, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard for a term of four 
years and he has served continuously since that time.  On July 1, 1998, he reenlisted for 
three years; and on June 1, 2001, he extended his enlistment for three months through 
September 30, 2001.  His most recent reenlistment occurred on October 1, 2001 for six 
years, wherein he was promised the Zone B SRB with a multiple of 1.5.   
 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  March  30,  2004,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (TJAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard 
submitted an advisory opinion.  He stated that although the applicant was erroneously 
promised  a  multiple  of  1.5  on  his  reenlistment  contract,  he  was  only  eligible  for  a 
multiple of 1.   In this regard, TJAG stated that ALCOAST 127/01 authorized a Zone B 
multiple  of  1  for  BM1s,  plus  an  additional  .5  for  those  having  at  least  one  of  the 
authorized surfman qualification codes.  He stated that the applicant did not have any 
of the authorized surfman qualifications codes, and therefore, he was not entitled to the 
additional .5 multiple.  
 

However, TJAG stated that in an effort to afford the applicant a result that most 
closely represents the bargain he claims, the Coast Guard recommends that the Board 
offer him two options:   
 

First,  Applicant  could  have  his  record  corrected  by  voiding  his 
reenlistment  contract  dated  October  1,  2001  and  subsequently  extending 
his period of service until the BCMR final decision.  Applicant could then 
be discharged if he so desires.  Under this option the applicant would be 
liable  to  the  Coast  Guard  for  his  unearned  SRB  payments.    The  second 
option would be to have the Board correct his record to show the actual 
SRB multiple of "1" to which he was entitled and the correct authority for 
that multiple.   

  

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE COAST GUARD’S VIEWS 

On  April  21,  2004,  the  applicant  replied  to  the  views  of  the  Coast  Guard.    He 

 
 
stated that he had no objections to the Coast Guard's recommendation.   
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 
Coast Guard Personnel Manual 
 
 
 

Article 3.C.6. (Change in Multiple) state the following: 

All Agreements to Extend Enlistments signed before the effective date of 
the change will be at the old multiple level.  All agreements made on or 

after the effective date of the change will be at the new level.  Members 
desiring to extend their enlistments or reenlist early to take advantage of a 
higher bonus multiple may do so within the provisions of this chapter and 
or Articles 1.G.14 and 12.B.7 [of this instruction].   

 
Pertinent ALCOASTS 
 

ALCOAST 127/01 was issued on March 27, 2001 and was effective from October 
1,  2001  through  January  31,  2002.    It  established  a  multiple  of  1  for  BM1s  plus  an 
additional .5 multiple for having certain surfman qualification codes.  
 

ALCOAST 182/03 was issued on April 24, 2003, and became effective on July 1, 
2003.  Under ALCOAST 182/03, BM1s were eligible for a Zone B SRB calculated with a 
multiple  of  two  and  were  entitled  to  an  additional  .5  multiple  for  having  certain 
qualification codes.   
 

 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

 
 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the  
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submissions, and appli-
cable law: 
 

1. 

The  Board  has  jurisdiction  concerning  this  matter  pursuant  to  10  U.S.C. 

§ 1552.  The application was timely. 
 

2.  The applicant was erroneously promised a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 1.5 
under ALCOAST 127/01.  The ALCOAST announced a multiple of 1 for BM1s plus an 
additional .5 for having certain surfman qualification codes.  The applicant did not have 
any of the authorized surfman qualification codes, and therefore he was only entitled to 
an SRB with a multiple of 1.  He was not entitled to the additional .5 multiple.   

 
3. Although the applicant received proper payment under ALCOAST 127/01, he 
has presented evidence showing that on October 1, 2001, he was improperly promised a 
Zone  B  SRB  with  a  multiple  of  1.5.    When  an  applicant  proves  that  he  has  received 
improper SRB counseling, the Board’s policy is not to offend the regulation by fulfilling 
the erroneous promises, but to return the applicant to the position he would have been 
in had he been properly counseled. 
 

4.  Therefore, if the applicant had been properly counseled, he would have been 
told that, under ALCOAST 127/01 he was eligible only for a multiple of 1, because he 
did  not  have  the  necessary  surfman  qualification  codes  to  obtain  the  additional  .5 
multiple.  In addition, the applicant would have been further counseled that since his 
then  current enlistment was due to expire on September 30, 2001, he was required to 
reenlist or extend on or before October 1, 2001, or he would have been discharged.  

 
5.      Even  though  it  was  necessary  for  the  applicant  to  extend  or  reenlist  by 
October 1, 2001 to avoid discharge, it is not clear from the applicant's statement whether 
he would have reenlisted for the maximum six years had he known that he would only 
receive  an  SRB  multiple  of  1.    Therefore,  the  Board  agrees  with  TJAG  that  since  the 
Coast  Guard  provided  the  applicant  with  an  erroneous  promise,  he  should  have  the 
option of voiding the six-year reenlistment contract.   The Board's policy is to make this 
option available to applicants where improper counseling or promises have occurred.  
The Board does not find any other relief to be warranted or necessary in this case.   
 
6.    The  alternative  relief  requested  by  the  applicant  that  would  permit  him  to 
 
reenlist under ALCOST 182/03 is not a remedy in this case.   First ALCOAST 182/03 
was not in effect on October 1, 2001; it became effective on July 1, 2003. Article 3.C.6. of 
the Personnel Manual makes it clear that a member is only entitled to the SRB multiple 
in  effect  on  the  date of reenlistment or extension.  Second, even if the applicant were 
able  to  reenlist  on  July  1,  2003,  the  effective  date  of ALOCAST 182/03, he would not 
have been eligible for an SRB under that ALCOAST because he would have had more 
than ten years of active duty on that date.  His tenth active duty anniversary occurred 
on  January  19,  2003.    According  to  3.C.4.b.3.  of  the  Personnel  Manual,  a  member  can 
have no more than ten years of active duty to be eligible for a Zone B SRB.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Accordingly, the applicant is entitled to the limited relief discussed above. 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE] 

7. 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

ORDER 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 Derek A. Capizzi 

 

The  application  of  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  USCG,  for  correction  of  his  military 
record  is  granted,  as  follows:    The  applicant  shall  be  given  the  option  of  having  the 
October 1, 2001, reenlistment contract voided and of being discharged from the Coast 
Guard.  If the applicant chooses to be discharged, his record shall show an extension of 
enlistment from October 1, 2001, until the date of his discharge.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 William R. Kraus 

 
 Jordan S. Fried