Search Decisions

Decision Text

CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-193
Original file (2004-193.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                     BCMR Docket No. 2004-193 
 
 
   

 

 
 

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 September 24, 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  May  19,  2005,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly  appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

 

The  applicant  asked  the  Board  to  correct  his  military  record  to  show  that  he 
enlisted in the Regular Coast Guard on November 3, 1998, for four years, rather than 
six, and then reenlisted on November 3, 2002, for six years, to receive a Zone A SRB.  
The applicant alleged that his Coast Guard records erroneously indicate that he enlisted 
for six years on November 3, 1998. 

 

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S RECORD 

 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve on April 20, 1998, for a period 
of  eight  years  under  the  Delayed  Entry/Enlistment  Program  (DEP).1    The  enlistment 
contract, DD Form 4/1, states that the applicant would be ordered to active duty as a 
reservist, unless he enlisted in the Regular Coast Guard prior to November 24, 1998, for 
a term of at least six years 
 

                                                 
1 The DEP allows recruits to enlist in the Coast Guard but postpone training for up to 365 days.  

On  November  3,  1998,  the  applicant  was  discharged  from  the  DEP  and 
immediately enlisted into the Regular Coast Guard.  The applicant’s contract, DD Form 
4/3, indicates in Block 20a that he was requesting “to be discharged from the DEP and 
enlisted  in  the  Regular  Component  of the  Coast  Guard  for  a  period  of  4  years.”    The 
applicant  did  not  sign  this  particular  section  of  the  contract.    However,  his  signature 
does appear at the bottom of the contract, confirming the enlistment.  The applicant was 
enlisted at the pay grade of E-2 pursuant to the Recruit Referral Program, under which 
a recruit who caused two other people to enlist in the Coast Guard would be enlisted as 
an E-2.  
 
The  applicant’s  Record  of  Military  Processing  form  (FF Form  1966/1)  indicates 
that the applicant enlisted on active duty on November 3, 1998, for a term of four years.  
The  Coast  Guard’s  military  processing  and  recruiting  databases  also  indicate  that  the 
applicant enlisted in the Regular Coast Guard on November 3, 1998, for a term of four 
years. 

 
The applicant’s Coast Guard record also contains a Statement of Understanding, 
signed  by  the  applicant  and  his  recruiter,  which  states  that  he  was  guaranteed 
assignment to the Electronic Technician (ET) Class “A” school,2 convening on February 
1, 1999.  
 

The  applicant’s  fourth  anniversary  on  active  duty,  November  3,  2002,  passed 
without any extension, of his original enlistment or reenlistment.  On April 29, 2003, the 
applicant  extended  his  enlistment  for  four  years  to  obligate  additional  service  for  a 
transfer to Hawaii.  The four-year extension contract indicates that the applicant’s new 
EOE was November 2, 2008.  The record indicates that he was counseled that he would 
receive  a  Zone  A  SRB  with  a  multiple  of  3.5  computed  with  48  months  of  newly 
obligated service.  However, he apparently did not receive the SRB. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  February  14,  2005,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (JAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard 
submitted  an  advisory  opinion  recommending  that  the  Board  grant  the  applicant’s 
request.  He based his recommendation on a memorandum on the case prepared by the 
Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC), who relied upon a memorandum prepared 
by the Coast Guard Recruiting Command (CGRC). 
 

The  JAG  stated  that  the  applicant’s  enlistment  package  reveals  numerous 
discrepancies, and that “it is impossible to prove precisely what [the] Applicant’s and 
                                                 
2  Class  “A”  School  is  the  Coast  Guard’s  advanced  training  school  where  members  are  trained  in  their 
chosen specialty (rate).  Class “A” schools range in length from five weeks to five months, depending on 
the career field. 
 

the  Coast  Guard’s  intentions  were  regarding  the  length  of  Applicant’s  initial 
enlistment.”    However,  the  JAG  agreed  with  CGPC’s  determination  that  it  was  the 
intent of the Coast Guard to enlist the applicant into the Regular Coast Guard for a term 
of  four  years  on  November  3,  1998,  at  the  pay  grade  of  E-2.    In  addition,  the  JAG 
recommended that the applicant’s record be corrected to indicate that he reenlisted on 
November  3,  2002,  for  a  term  of  six  years  and  is  therefore  entitled  to  a  Zone  A  SRB.  
Finally,  the  JAG  recommended  that  the  Board  void  the  applicant’s  April  29,  2003, 
extension contract. 
 

 
 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On February 24, 2005, the Chair sent a copy of the views of the Coast Guard to 
the applicant and invited him to respond within 30 days.  The letter was returned to the 
Chair by the U.S. Post Office because the applicant had moved and the Post Office did 
not have a forwarding address on file.  
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 
 
Article  2.D.2.b.  of  the  Coast  Guard  Recruiting  Manual  states  that  pending 
enlistment in the Regular Coast Guard, individuals will be enlisted in the Coast Guard 
Reserve for a period of eight years.  
 

Article 2.D.2.e. of the Recruiting Manual states that within 12 months of entering 
the program, a DEP enlistee shall be enlisted in the Regular Coast Guard for four or six 
years provided he remains fully qualified.  
 
 
Article 3.G.1. of the Recruiting Manual establishes the procedures for processing 
recruits  with  a  guaranteed  “A”  school.    There  is  no  requirement  for  a  six-year 
obligation. 
 
Article 3.G.4. of the Recruiting Manual states that DEP designees with no prior 
 
service who cause two other non-prior service applicants to enlist in the Coast Guard or 
the Coast Guard Reserve shall be enlisted in pay grade E-2.  
 
 
ALCOAST 329/02 was issued on July 3, 2002, and was in effect from August 5, 
2002, through June 30, 2003.  Under ALCOAST 329/02, ET2s were eligible for an SRB 
calculated with a multiple of 3.5. 
 

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 submission, and appli-
cable law: 
 
 
§ 1552.   The application was timely filed. 

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

1. 

 
2. 

The  JAG  stated  that  there  are  numerous  discrepancies  in  the  applicant’s 
enlistment package, but that the records indicate that the Coast Guard intended to enlist 
the  applicant  in  the  Regular  Coast  Guard  for  a  period  of  four  years  on  November  3, 
1998, at the pay grade of E-2.  The Board agrees.  Although the applicant’s enlistment 
contract  states  that  unless  he  enlisted  before  November  24,  1998,  for  no  less  than  six 
years,  he  would  be  ordered  to  active  duty  as  a  reservist,  and  although  the  applicant 
apparently  did  not  attempt  to  reenlist  after  he  completed  four  years  of  service,  the 
preponderance of the evidence in the record suggests that the Coast Guard intended to 
enlist him for four years.  The Board notes that the applicant was discharged from the 
DEP  on  November  3,  1998,  and  immediately  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Coast  Guard  for 
four years, pursuant to Article 2.D.2.e. of the Recruiting Manual.  In addition, there are 
a  host  of  other  documents  in  the  applicant’s  Coast  Guard  record  that  convince  the 
Board that it was the intent of the applicant and the Coast Guard to enlist the applicant 
for a term of four years on November 3, 1998.  The Board reaches this conclusion even 
though the applicant’s April 29, 2003, extension contract suggests that the applicant and 
the Coast Guard were operating on the belief that he had enlisted in the Coast Guard 
for  a  term  of  six  years.    However,  despite  these  discrepancies,  there  is  sufficient 
documentation in the record to satisfy the Board that it was the intent of the applicant 
and the Coast Guard to enlist him for a term of four years on November 3, 1998.   

 
3. 

The applicant was enlisted at the pay grade of E-2 because he caused two 
other people to enlist in the Coast Guard.  Pursuant to Article 3.G.4. of the Recruiting 
Manual,  applicants  with  no  prior  service  who  cause  two  other  non-prior  service 
applicants to enlist in the Coast Guard or the Coast Guard Reserve shall be enlisted in 
pay  grade  E-2.    The  article  does  not  state  that  the  enlistee  must  enlist  for  a  specific 
number of years to obtain the pay grade increase. 

 
4. 

The applicant was promised the Class “A” school for his rating when he 
enlisted in the DEP.  Article 3.G.1. of the Recruiting Manual establishes the procedures 
for processing recruits with a guaranteed “A” school, and it does not state that there is 
minimum term of enlistment for recruits who are guaranteed assignment to a particular 
“A” school. 
 

5. 

The  applicant  has  proven  by  a  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  he 
enlisted for a term of four years on November 3, 1998, and was eligible to reenlist on 
November 2, 2002, to receive Zone A SRB.  

 
6. 

Accordingly,  relief  should  be  granted  by  correcting  the  record  to  show 
that the applicant enlisted for four years on November 3, 1998, and that he reenlisted on 
November 2, 2002, for six years to receive a Zone A SRB. 

 

 

ORDER 

 
 

 
 

 
 
The military record of  ___________________, shall be corrected to show that he 
enlisted in the Regular Coast Guard on November 3, 1998, for a term of four years at the 
pay grade of E-2, and that he reenlisted on November 3, 2002, for a period of six years 
and is eligible for a Zone A SRB.  His four-year extension contract dated April 29, 2003, 
shall be removed from his record as null and void.  The Coast Guard shall pay him any 
amounts due under ALCOAST 329/02 as a result of these corrections.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 George A. Weller 

 
 Dorothy J. Ulmer 

 

 
 William R. Kraus 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 



Similar Decisions

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-168

    Original file (2004-168.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX. This final decision, dated April 21, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by replacing his October 1, 2002, six-year extension contract with a reenlistment contract to receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 in accordance with ALCOAST...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2009-117

    Original file (2009-117.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Coast Guard erred when it counseled the applicant that he was eligible to receive a Zone B SRB for signing a six-year reenlistment contract on January 31, 2002. of the Personnel Manual, which show that a member’s SRB equals his monthly basic pay, multiplied by the SRB multiple authorized under the ALCOAST in effect, multiplied the number of months of service newly obligated under the contract, and divided by 12, if the appli- cant had reenlisted for four years on this 6th anniversary...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2007-210

    Original file (2007-210.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated May 29, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, a first class gunner’s mate (GM1/E-6), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he reenlisted for six years on both his sixth and tenth active duty anniversa- ries to receive Zone A and Zone B selective reenlistment bonuses (SRBs).1 The applicant alleged that on November 16, 2006, he learned from his unit’s yeoman that he had been eligible to receive...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-154

    Original file (2004-154.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant alleged that when he signed a six-year extension contract on May 1, 2003, he was counseled that he would receive an SRB with a multiple of 2.5. The Board also finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled at the time of his May 1, 2003, reenlistment, he would have had the following options: Reenlist as he did for an SRB with a multiple of 2.0 under ALCOAST 329/02; a. b. c. Be discharged from the Coast Guard. of the Personnel Manual, and at the termination of said...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2004-156

    Original file (2004-156.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    This final decision, dated March 31, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an operations specialist second class (OS2), asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 2.1 He alleged that, prior to being transferred to his current station on July 7, 2003, he was not properly counseled about his eligibility for an SRB when he signed a...

  • CG | BCMR | SRBs | 2003-108

    Original file (2003-108.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    By that time, ALCOAST 182/03 was in effect and the SRB multiple for MK2s in Zone A was just 1.5.5 In support of his allegations, the applicant pointed out that his command failed to have him sign a CG-3307 (“page 7”) to acknowledge receiving proper SRB counseling when he signed the one-year extension contract on November 18, 2002. Therefore, the Board finds that the applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he was miscounseled in November 2002 that, if he extended...

  • 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 | 2003-020

    Original file (2003-020.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.” Members who have completed at least 6 years but no more than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.” Members may not receive more than one bonus per zone. On July 1, 1999, after receiving transfer orders to a new station, the applicant was advised that an SRB multiple was authorized for his rating and that if he reenlisted or extended his enlistment for at least three...

  • 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 | 2004-153

    Original file (2004-153.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant, who was a reservist on extended active duty (EAD)2 at the time of her enlistment/reenlistment into the regular Coast Guard, alleged that she is entitled to the SRB because her previous active duty service causes her enlistment to be characterized as a reenlistment. The enlistment of Coast Guard Reserve personnel who are serving on extended active duty and who have served on extended active duty for 12 months or more shall be considered a reenlistment.” member must meet the...