Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-149
Original file (2004-149.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  
 

 
BCMR Docket No. 2004-149 

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  July  7,  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 February10, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by voiding his 5-year 
reenlistment contract and replacing it with a 6-year reenlistment contract.  He alleged 
that he was erroneously counseled about the amount of the selective reenlistment bonus 
(SRB)1 he would receive for reenlisting in the Coast Guard.   

 

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S RECORD 

 
 
On October 9, 2001, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard as a Boatswain’s 
Mate, third class (BM3) for a term of 4 years, through October 8, 2005.  On June 8, 2004, 
the  applicant  signed  a  5-year  reenlistment  contract,  through  June  7,  2009,  to  obligate 
service for transfer.  The applicant signed an administrative remarks (page 7) on June 8, 
2004, which stated the following:  
 

I have been advised that my current [SRB] multiple is 1 and is 
listed in ALCOAST 182/03, which has been made available to me. 
 
I am eligible to reenlist up to a maximum of 6 years.  My SRB 
will be computed based on 56 months of newly obligated service. 
 

                                                 
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, which is published in an 
ALCOAST.  Personnel Manual, Article 3.C.1. 
 

I hereby acknowledge that I have read and fully understand the 
contents and explanation of COMDINST 7220.133 (series). 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 

 

On November 15, 2004, the Judge Advocate General (TJAG) of the Coast Guard 
recommended  that  the  Board  deny  the  applicant’s  request.    TJAG  alleged  that  the 
applicant  failed  to  carry  his  burden  of  production  and  persuasion  and  offered  no 
evidence  to  support  his  claim  that  he  was  improperly  counseled  regarding  his  SRB 
entitlements.   TJAG also alleged that the applicant was properly counseled regarding 
his SRB and was given the appropriate page 7 to document the counseling. 

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On November 19, 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.3. of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual (Written Agreements) states 
that “[a]ll personnel with 10 years or less of active service who reenlist or extend for any 
period,  however  brief,  shall  be  counseled  on  the  SRB  program.    They  shall  sign  an 
Administrative Remarks, CG 3301 (page 7), service record entry outlining the effect that 
particular action has on their SRB entitlement.” 
 

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 182/03 was issued by the Commandant on April 24, 2003, and was in 
 
effect from July 1, 2003, through July 31, 2004.  Under ALCOAST 182/03, BM3s were 
eligible for a Zone A SRB calculated with a multiple of 1.  
 

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  June  8,  2004,  the  applicant  signed  a  5-year  reenlistment  contract  to 
obligate  service  for  transfer  to  Coast  Guard  Station  Southwest  Harbor,  Maine,  in 
accordance  with  Article  4.B.6.a.1.    He  was  counseled  that  pursuant  to  ALCOAST 
182/03, he would receive a Zone A SRB calculated with 56 months of newly obligated 
service.      However,  the  counseling  was  in  error  because  the  amount  of  previously 
obligated service to be subtracted from the SRB was improperly calculated.  When the 

2.  

applicant  signed  the  reenlistment  contract  on  June  8,  2004,  his  previous  end  of 
enlistment  (EOE)  date  was  October  8,  2005.    Therefore,  when  he  signed  the  5-year 
reenlistment  contract  on  June  8,  2004,  the  applicant  had  16  months  of  previously 
obligated  service  remaining  on  his  original  enlistment  contract,  and  he  should  have 
been  counseled that pursuant to Article 3.C.5.1., his SRB would be computed with 44 
months of newly obligated service, and not 56 months as shown on the page 7 in his 
record.   
 
 
The applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he was 
improperly counseled regarding his eligibility for a Zone A SRB.  If the applicant had 
been properly counseled, he would have been told that, to receive an SRB based on at 
least 56 months of obligated service, he would have to reenlist for 6 years instead of 5.     
 
 
The Board finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled on June 
8,  2004,  he  likely  would  have  reenlisted  for  6  years  to  receive  the  larger  SRB  he  was 
promised.  
 
 
6. 
above.   
 

Accordingly,  relief  should  be  granted  in  accordance  with  the  findings 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] 

4. 

5. 

 
 
 

 

ORDER 

The  application  of  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his 

military record is granted as follows: 

 
The term of the June 8, 2004, reenlistment contract in his record shall be 6 years 
instead  of  5  years.    The  Coast  Guard  shall  pay  the  applicant  any  amount  due  under 
ALCOAST 182/03 as a result of this correction. 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 

 
  

 
 

 
 
 

 

 

 
 James G. Parks 

 

 

 
 Dorothy J. Ulmer 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________ 
 Darren S. Wall 
 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-066

    Original file (2004-066.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated October 13, 2004, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he was entitled to a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 1.5, instead of the multiple of 1 which he received for signing a four-year extension contract on April 25, 2003. However, this ALCOAST was not in effect on the day the applicant signed the extension contract. Article 3.C.6...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-112

    Original file (2004-112.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-122

    Original file (2004-122.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 military record by canceling his four-year extension contract and replacing it with a six-year reenlistment contract. On his March 2004 extension contract, the applicant stated that the reason for the extension was “request of individual”. In accordance with the Article 1.G.15.e., he was not eligible to extend his enlistment prior to May...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-026

    Original file (2004-026.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Coast Guard members who have at least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Coast Guard Personnel Manual Article 3.C.3 (Written Agreements) states that "all personnel with 10 years or less active service who reenlist or extend for any period, however brief, shall be counseled on the SRB program." However, when he reenlisted, he was incorrectly advised by Coast Guard personnel that he was...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-065

    Original file (2004-065.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the Personnel Command denied the applicant’s request for an extension pursuant to COMDINST 7220.33.2 The applicant also alleged that if evidence of his successful completion of the Navigation Rules examination (NAVRULS) had been placed in his military record prior to his reenlistment, then he would have been eligible for an SRB multiple of 2 under ALCOAST 182/03. If the applicant had been told on April 29, 2003, that his request for a one- month extension was denied, he would have...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-079

    Original file (2004-079.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated November 12, 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 selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 3.5, instead of the multiple of 2.5 that he received for signing a six-year reenlistment contract on March 21, 2004. When he executed the extension contract, the applicant was counseled that he was eligible to receive a Zone B SRB with...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-147

    Original file (2004-147.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated February 10, 2005, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by voiding his 4-year reenlistment contract dated May 11, 2000, and replacing it with a 4-year reenlistment contract dated February 8, 2000, to receive a 6th active duty anniversary1 Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).2 The applicant alleged that he was never counseled that he could reenlist on his 6th anniversary of active...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2003-141

    Original file (2003-141.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Coast Guard members who have less than 6 of active duty service are in “Zone A.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. TJAG stated that in an effort to afford the applicant a result that most closely represents the bargain she claimed, the Coast Guard recommended that the Board offer her two options: First, Applicant could have her record corrected by voiding her reenlistment contract dated 3 June 2003 and subsequently extending her period of service until the BCMR final decision. ...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-062

    Original file (2004-062.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. 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. ORDER Derek A. Capizzi The...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-039

    Original file (2004-039.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Coast Guard members who have at least 6 but no more than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Article 3.C., Coast Guard Personnel Manual. If the applicant had been properly counseled, it would be reasonable to assume that he would have extended for one (01) year to meet the obligated service requirement to accept his orders and prior to the effective date of the extension [July 11, 2003] he would have reenlisted for the Zone B SRB multiple of [2.5] that he was promised. The...