DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx  
 

 
BCMR Docket No. 2004-129 

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 26, 2004, upon the 
BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s request for correction.  
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This final decision, dated January 13, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by canceling his 4- 
year  reenlistment  contract  dated  April  21,  2004,  and  replacing  it  with  a  14-month 
extension contract.  He alleged that he was erroneously counseled and told that he had 
to  obligate  service  to  accept  transfer  orders  and  that  he  would  receive  a  Zone  A 
selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 for his 4-year reenlistment.  The applicant alleged 
that shortly after signing the reenlistment contract, he learned that he was not eligible 
for the SRB because he had already received a Zone A SRB for a previous reenlistment.  
The  applicant  now  seeks  to  replace  that  4-year  extension  contract  with  a  14-month 
extension contract to meet his minimum obligated service requirement. 

 

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S RECORD 

 
 
On April 20, 2000, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve on extended 
active  duty  for  a  term  of  2  years,  through  April  19,  2002.    On  April  17,  2002,  the 
applicant enlisted in the regular Coast Guard for a term of 3 years, through April 16, 
2005, and received a Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 485/01.  On April 21, 2004, the 
applicant  reenlisted  for  another  4  years  to  obligate  sufficient  service  for  transfer  to  a 
                                                 
1  SRBs allow the Coast Guard to offer a reenlistment incentive to members who possess highly desired 
skills at certain points during their career. 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  authorized  for  the  member’s  skill/rating,  that  is  published  in  an 
ALCOAST.  
 

cutter based in Boston, Massachusetts, and this reenlistment contract indicates that he 
was promised another Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 182/03.   

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 

 

On  August  18,  2004,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (TJAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard 
recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s request but grant alternative relief.  
TJAG  stated  that  when  the  applicant  reenlisted  on  April  21,  2004,  there  was  no 
authority  to  pay  him  a  second  Zone  A  SRB.    However,  in  an  effort  to  provide  the 
applicant  with  result  that  most  closely  resembles  the  bargain  he  claims,  TJAG 
recommended that the Board void the April 2004 reenlistment contract and replace it 
with a 27-month extension contract, which, TJAG stated, was the actual minimum time 
required for the applicant to meet the obligated service requirement for his transfer.   

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On August 24, 2004, the Chair sent a copy of the views of the Coast Guard to the 

 
 
applicant and invited him to respond within thirty days.  No response was received.  
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

Article 3.C.4.a.6. of the Personnel Manual provides that to receive a Zone A SRB, 

the member cannot have previously received a Zone A SRB.   
 

Article 4.B.6.a. states that service members E-4 and above, including active duty 
Reservists, with fewer than six years of active duty, will not be transferred unless they 
reenlist or extend to have enough obligated service for a full tour upon reporting to a 
new unit. 

 
Article 4.A.5.b. states that the tour length for members with the applicant’s pay 
grade  serving  aboard  a  Coast  Guard  cutter  based  in  Boston,  Massachusetts  is  three 
years.   
 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

1. 

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

 
 
The  Board  makes  the  following  findings  and  conclusions  on  the  basis  of  the 
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submission, and appli-
cable law: 
 
 
§ 1552.  The application was timely. 
 
 
On April 21, 2004, the applicant signed a 4-year reenlistment contract for 
obligated  service  purposes  and  was  counseled  that  he  would  receive  a  Zone  A  SRB.  
However, the applicant was not eligible for the SRB because he had already received a 
Zone A SRB for his April 2002 reenlistment.  Article  3.C.4.a.6. of the Personnel Manual 
clearly states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member cannot have previously received 
a  Zone  A  SRB.    In  this  case,  the  applicant  received  a  Zone  A  SRB  when  he  left  the 
Reserves and enlisted into the Regular Coast Guard on April 17, 2002.  Accordingly, he 
is not entitled to another Zone A SRB for his April 21, 2004, reenlistment. 
 

2.  

3. 

 
The  applicant  was  erroneously  counseled  regarding  his  entitlement  to  a 
second Zone A SRB when he reenlisted on April 21, 2004.  However, when an applicant 
proves, as applicant does here, that he has received improper 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.  
Therefore, if the applicant had been properly counseled, he would have been told that, 
in accordance with Article 3.C.4.a.6. of the Personnel Manual, he had already received a 
Zone  A  SRB  and  was  not  eligible  to  receive  another  SRB  for  his  April  21,  2004, 
reenlistment.  
 

4. 

The  applicant  requested  that  his  April  21,  2004,  reenlistment  contract  be 
canceled and replaced with a 14-month extension contract to meet his obligated service 
requirement.  However, the applicant was required to obligate more than 14 months of 
service  when  he  signed  the  April  2004  reenlistment  contract  to  accept  the  transfer 
orders.    Pursuant  to  Article  4.B.6.a.  of  the  Personnel  Manual,  when  the  applicant 
accepted  the  transfer  orders  he  was  obligated  to  reenlist  or  extend  to  have  enough 
obligated  service  for  a  full  tour  upon  reporting  to  his  new  unit.    In  this  case,  the 
applicant  was  being  assigned  sea  duty  aboard  a  cutter  and  under Article 4.A.5.b was 
obligated to reenlist or extend to complete a full 3-year tour.  The applicant reported to 
the  cutter  on  June  24,  2004,  and  his  end  of  enlistment date (EOE) before transfer was 
April  16,  2005.    Therefore,  he  was  required  to  obligate  2  years  and  3  months  of 
additional service prior to reporting to the cutter. 
  
 
findings above.   
 

Accordingly,  relief  should  be  granted  in  part  in  accordance  with  the 

5. 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] 

 
 
 

 

ORDER 

The application of XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, for correction of his military 

record is granted in part as follows: 

 
The  April  21,  2004,  reenlistment  contract  shall  be  null  and  void.    A  27-month 

extension contract dated April 21, 2004, shall be placed in his record.   

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                     Eric J. Young 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 Nancy L. Friedman 

 

 

 
 William R. Kraus