DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
XXXXX xxxxxxx.
Xx xx xxxx, YN3/E-4
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2005-062
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
Author: Hale, D.
The applicant asked the Board to void her current 5-year reenlistment contract
and replace it with a 3-year extension contract. On December 21, 2004, the applicant
received transfer orders and was required to have 4 years of obligated service to accept
the orders. On January 14, 2005, she signed a 5-year reenlistment contract to obligate
sufficient service to accept the orders. The applicant alleged that a yeoman told her that
she had to reenlist for 5 years to obligate sufficient service because she had already used
her maximum allowable time for extensions. The applicant further alleged that the
yeoman was mistaken and that she could have extended her enlistment for 3 years in
lieu of reenlisting for 5 years. The record indicates that the applicant had previously
extended her enlistment on two separate occasions for a total of 3 years.
On June 15, 2005, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard
recommended that the Board grant relief. He stated that the Coast Guard erred and
that the applicant was only required to extend her enlistment for 2 years and 9 months
to obligate sufficient service for transfer. He noted that she had previously used 3 of the
6 years of extensions allowed by the Coast Guard.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under Articles 4.A.5.b. and 4.B.6.a. of the Personnel Manual, the applicant
needed to reenlist or extend her enlistment to have at least 4 years of obligated service
prior to accepting her transfer orders. On the effective date of her orders, she had 1
year and 3 months remaining on her enlistment. Accordingly, the applicant was only
required to extend her enlistment for 2 years and 9 months to obligate a 4-year tour.
Under Article 1.G.15.c., the total of all extensions of an enlistment may not exceed 6 years, and
as the JAG noted, the applicant had previously used 3 years of extensions and was
eligible for another 3 years of extensions. The preponderance of the evidence suggests
that if she had been properly counseled, she would have signed a 2 year, 9 month
extension contract to obligate sufficient service to accept her transfer orders.
Accordingly, her request should be granted.
[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]
ORDER
The military record of YN3 XXXX XXXXX, xxx xx xxxx, USCG, shall be corrected
by removing the January 14, 2005, 5-year reenlistment contract from her record as null
and void and replacing it with a 2-year, 9-month extension contract.
September 22, 2005
Date
Frank H. Esposito
Randall J. Kaplan
Dorothy J. Ulmer
2 Obligated service refers to all periods of military service covered by signed agreements in the form of enlistment contracts, reenlistment contracts and/or agreements to extend enlistment between Coast Guard members and the U.S. Coast Guard where members agree to serve for designated periods of time. When he received transfer orders in June 2003, the applicant should have been required to obligate sufficient service to complete a full tour of duty (four years) before accepting the...
of the Coast Guard Training and Education Manual, before reporting to “A” school on January 22, 2000, she needed to obligate sufficient service — 19 more months — to complete the 14 weeks of school and have 26 months remaining on her enlistment upon completion of the school.3 Therefore, the applicant is entitled to have the term of her January 20, 2000, extension contract corrected to 19 months. The Board finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled regarding her SRB eligibility,...
However, he stated, “Knowing that the SRB message [a new ALCOAST] was set to come out a month from that time, I opted to just extend for three months to wait and see if the SRB multiple might increase.” The applicant alleged that the YN3 told him that if he extended his enlistment for just 3 months and the SRB multiple changed under the new ALCOAST, he could cancel the extension by reenlisting to get an SRB after he arrived at his new unit. However, there is no Page 7 dated May 1, 2009,...
AMENDED ORDER The Board’s order correcting the military record of XXXXX, USCG, is hereby amended to read as follows: Her record shall be corrected to show that on December 24, 1998, she reenlisted The extension contracts signed by the applicant on September 30, 1998, and for six years for the purpose of receiving an SRB with a multiple of three under ALDIST 290/98. 1999-056 The applicant, a xxxxxxxxxxxxxx on active duty in the Coast Guard, asked the Board to correct her military record by...
This final decision, dated August 11, 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 five- year extension contract dated April 2, 1999, and replacing it with a seven-month extension followed by a six-year reenlistment to receive a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 calculated with a multiple of 2.0. to obligate sufficient service to transfer and reenlisted when the SRB was...
(3) of COMDTINST 7220.33, the applicant’s extension did not qualify her to receive an SRB because, although it was signed on January 21, 1998, it did not become operative until October 31, 1998, almost six months past her tenth anniversary on active duty. (3) of Enclosure (1) to Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (Reenlistment Bonus Programs Administration) states that to be eligible for a Zone B SRB, a member must “[h]ave completed at least 6 but not more than 10 years active service on the...
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...
2008-004 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked that his record be corrected so that he is entitled to the 42 months of a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) payment that was deducted as previously obligated service from the Zone B SRB that he received as a result of his May 15, 2007 reenlistment. The Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s request because the Coast Guard failed to counsel the applicant correctly about the amount of...
CG | BCMR | Advancement and Promotion | 2009-007
This final decision, dated July 16, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an intelligence specialist, third class (IS3), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he signed a four-year reenlistment contract on July 16, 2008, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).1 He alleged that when he received his transfer orders to Portsmouth, VA, he was erroneously counseled about his SRB eligibility and...
This final decision, dated July 16, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an intelligence specialist, third class (IS3), asked the Board to correct his record to show that he signed a four-year reenlistment contract on July 16, 2008, to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB).1 He alleged that when he received his transfer orders to Portsmouth, VA, he was erroneously counseled about his SRB eligibility and...