DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2004-112 
 
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. 
 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
Author: Hale, D. 
 
 
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  May  7,  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  December  16,  2004,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by canceling his May 
6,  2003,  three-year  extension  contract,  and  replacing  it  with  a  six-year  reenlistment 
contract  dated  after  he  was  advanced  to  Machinery  Technician,  Second  class  (MK2).  
The  applicant  alleged  that  this  would  allow  him  to  receive  a  Zone  A  selective 
reenlistment  bonus  (SRB)1  based  on  his  rating  of  MK2  because  there  was  no  SRB 
available for MK3s.  He alleged that when he signed the extension contract on May 6, 
2003, to obligate sufficient service to accept his transfer orders, he was advised that he 
could  cancel  the  contract  before  it  became  operative  on  July  18,  2004,  and  reenlist  to 
receive a maximum SRB.  However, he subsequently learned that he could not cancel 
the  extension  contract  and  that  the  months  of  service  he  had  obligated  would  count 
against any SRB he received for reenlisting. 
 

                                                 
1 SRBs vary according to the length of each member’s active duty service, the number of months of service 
newly obligated by the reenlistment or extension of enlistment contract, and the need of the Coast Guard 
for personnel with the member’s particular skills, which is reflected in the “multiple” of the SRB author-
ized for the member’s skill/rating, which is published in an ALCOAST.  Coast Guard members who have 
at least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A.” COMDTINST 7220.33. 

 
 

 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
On  July  18,  2000,  the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Coast  Guard  for  a  term  of  four 
years,  through  July  17,  2004.    On  December  30,  2002,  the  applicant  received  transfer 
orders  to  Coast  Guard  Station  Harbor  Beach,  Michigan  (“Harbor  Beach”).  On  May  6, 
2003, the applicant signed a three-year extension contract to obligate service for transfer 
to Harbor Beach.  The extension obligated him to serve through July 17, 2007.  When he 
signed  the  extension  contract,  the  applicant  was  an  MK3  awaiting  advancement  to 
MK2.    The  applicant  did  not  receive  an  SRB  because  under  ALCOAST  329/02  only 
MK2s  were  authorized  the  SRB.    On  June  27,  2003, the applicant reported to his new 
duty station.  He was advanced from MK3 to MK2 on July 1, 2003.   
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 
Article 1.G.14.a.2. of the Personnel Manual provides that a member may extend 
 
his reenlistment “[f]or any number of full years and/or full months up to six years to 
ensure sufficient obligated service [OBLISERV] for these purposes: … c. INCONUS and 
OUTCONUS assignments; [see] Article 4.B.6.” 
 

Article 4.B.6.a.1. of the Personnel Manual provides that members with less than 
six years of active duty will not normally be transferred “unless they reenlist or extend 
to  have  enough  obligated  service  for  a  full  tour  on  reporting  to  a  new  unit.”    Article 
4.B.6.b.  provides  that  the  transfer  orders  of a member who refuses to meet the OBLI-
SERV requirement may be canceled, and the member will be reassigned for the remain-
der of his enlistment in accordance with the needs of the Coast Guard. 

 
Article 3.C.3. of the Personnel Manual provides that “all personnel with 10 years 
or less of active service who reenlist or extend for any period, shall be counseled on the 
SRB  program.    They  shall  sign  an  Administrative  Remarks,  CG-3307  (Page  7),  … 
outlining the effect that particular action has on their SRB entitlement.”   

 
 
Article 1.G.19.2.b. of the Personnel Manual provides that extension contracts for 
terms of two years or less may be canceled prior to their operative dates to allow the 
member to sign a new, longer extension or reenlistment contract to receive an SRB.  A 
canceled short extension contract executed to fulfill an OBLISERV requirement does not 
diminish the size of the SRB received under the new contract. 
 

Article  3.C.5.1.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  states  that  when  a  member  reenlists 
before  finishing  his  previous  contract  term,  “[a]ll  periods  of  unexecuted  service 
obligation … will be deducted from SRB computation.”   

 

ALCOAST 329/02 was issued on July 2, 2002, and was in effect from August 5, 
2002, through June 30, 2003.  It established SRB multiples for personnel in certain skill 
ratings who reenlisted or extended their enlistments for at least three years and up to 
six  years.    Under  ALCOAST  329/02,  members  who  were  MK2s  (but  not MK3s) were 
eligible for a Zone A SRB calculated with a multiple of 2.   
 
 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On June 29, 2004, the Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard (TJAG) stated 
 
that because this case is analogous to the fact pattern in BCMR docket number 2003-001, 
he recommended denial consistent with our decision in that case.2  
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE COAST GUARD’S VIEWS 

 
 
On July 1, 2004, the BCMR sent the applicant a copy of TJAG’s advisory opinion 
and invited him to respond.  The BCMR received the applicant’s response on July 30, 
2004, in which he disagreed with TJAG’s recommendation. 
 

 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. 

Since  his  reporting  date  to  his  new  assignment  was  June  27,  2003,  the 
applicant  was  required,  by  or  before  that  date,  to  have  obligated  sufficient  service  to 
complete  a  four-year  tour  at  his  new  assignment  pursuant  to  Article  4.B.6.a.  of  the 
Personnel Manual.  He was not advanced to MK2 prior to arriving at his new station in 
June 2003.  Therefore, he had to sign the extension contract while still an MK3.  Under 
ALCOAST 329/02, MK3s were not eligible for an SRB.  Moreover, even if the applicant 
had requested a delay in his reporting date to his new assignment, there is no evidence 
that the Coast Guard Personnel Command would have granted him one.   

 

                                                 
2 In BCMR Docket Number 2003-001, the applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he 
was  entitled  to  a  Zone  A  SRB  based  on  his  pay  grade  of  MK2,  rather  than  a  partial  SRB  reduced  by 
previously obligated service.  However, the Board denied relief, noting that granting the correction would 
ignore the OBLISERV requirement. 
  

3. 

The  record  contains  a  copy  of  the  applicant’s  extension  contract  dated 
May  6,  2003.    The  contract  contains  a  paragraph  that  states  the  member  has  been 
counseled about SRBs, has had an opportunity to read the rules, and fully understands 
the  effect  his  extension  will  have  on  his  current  and  future  SRB  eligibility.    The 
applicant signed his name in the space below the paragraph.  However, there is no page 
7 in his record documenting proper SRB counseling, as required by Article 3.C.11. of the 
Personnel Manual.  The applicant has not proved that he was miscounseled.  However, 
assuming  arguendo  that  he  was,  when  an  applicant  proves  that  he  has  received 
improper  SRB  counseling,  the  Board’s  policy  is  not  to  fulfill  the  erroneous  promises 
made by the applicant’s command, but to return the applicant to the position he would 
have been in had he been properly counseled. 

If the applicant had been properly counseled in May 2003, he would have 
been told that because the extension contract he would have to sign to accept the tour at 
Harbor  Beach  was  for  more  than two years’ duration, he could not cancel it before it 
became operative to receive an SRB without having the SRB reduced by his previously 
obligated service. 

In  BCMR  Docket  Numbers  2002-116  and  2002-186,  in  which  the  Board 
granted relief, the applicants were promoted to their higher rating after they received 
their transfer orders but long before they had to report to the their new duty stations.  
In  the  instant  case,  however,  the  applicant  was  required  to  report  to  his  new  duty 
station  prior  to  being  advanced  to  MK2.    Thus,  like  the  applicant  in  BCMR  Docket 
Number 2003-001, the applicant in this case cannot avoid the OBLISERV requirements.  
There is no evidence in the record that the Coast Guard would have permitted him to 
avoid these requirements or to delay his reporting date until after he was advanced to 
MK2. 

 
6. 

Although  the  Board  cannot  grant  the  requested  relief,  under  Article 
3.C.5.6.  of  the  Personnel  Manual,  the  applicant  could  have  canceled  his  May  6,  2003, 
three-year  extension  contract  by  signing  a  six-year  reenlistment  contract  on  July  18, 
2004,  to  obtain  a  Zone  A  SRB  under  ALCOAST  182/03.    Canceling  the  extension 
contract will reduce the applicant’s SRB because, under Article 3.C.5.1., when a member 
reenlists before finishing his previous contract term, “[a]ll periods of unexecuted service 
obligation … will be deducted from SRB computation.”  However, the Board finds that 
the applicant might have forgone this opportunity for an SRB based on the belief that 
this  Board  would  grant  his  requested  correction.    Therefore,  the  Board  will  grant  the 
applicant the opportunity for an SRB that he missed on July 18, 2004.  If the applicant 
chooses to cancel the May 2003 extension and reenlist for six years on July 18, 2004, his 
SRB will be calculated with 36 months of newly obligated service. 
 
 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be granted in part. 

7. 

 
4. 

 
5. 

 

 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]

 

ORDER 

 

The application of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, for correction of his 

military record is granted in part as follows: 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 
 Donald A. Pedersen  

 
At the applicant’s discretion, his record shall be corrected to show that on July 
18, 2003, he cancelled his three-year extension and reenlisted for six years to receive a 
Zone A SRB based on 36 months of newly obligated service under ALCOAST 182/03.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 Darren S. Wall 

 
 

 

 
 J. Carter Robertson