DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2005-121 
 
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 

 

FINAL DECISION 

 
AUTHOR:  Andrews, J. 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
 
title 10 and section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  The Chair docketed the 
application on June 14, 2005, upon receipt of the completed application. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  April  5,  2006,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly  appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he will be entitled to 
receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for reenlisting on his sixth active 
duty anniversary in May 2001 and a Zone B SRB for reenlisting on his tenth active duty 
anniversary in May 2005.1   

 
The applicant alleged that he was eligible for a Zone A SRB when he extended 
his original enlistment in 1999, but was not properly counseled and never received the 
bonus.  He further alleged that when he asked about receiving a Zone A SRB prior to 
his sixth anniversary on active duty, which was May 22, 2001, he again received no SRB 
counseling and was told to wait until October 2001 to reenlist.  However, by the time he 
                                                 
1 SRBs vary according to the length of each member’s active duty service, the number of months of serv-
ice  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.    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.  COMDTINST 7220.33. 
 

reenlisted, he was in Zone B and so received a Zone B bonus and missed his opportu-
nity for a Zone A bonus.  

 
The applicant alleged that because he was never paid the SRB he was promised 
in 1999, he should have been allowed to reenlist for a Zone A SRB in 2001, in which case 
he would have been eligible to reenlist for a Zone B SRB on his tenth active duty anni-
versary in May 2005. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
On  May  22,  1995,  the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Coast  Guard  for  four  years, 
through  May  21,  1999.    He  was  advanced  to  boatswain’s  mate  third  class  (BM3)  on 
December 1, 1997. 
 
 
On April 30, 1998, in receipt of transfer orders, the applicant signed a 37-month 
extension contract, which obligated him to serve through June 21, 2002.  The extension 
was  necessary  for  the  applicant  to  accept  the  transfer  orders  because  under  Article 
4.B.6.a. of the Personnel Manual, members with less than six years of service must obli-
gate sufficient service to complete a full tour of duty at the new unit before accepting 
their transfer orders.  Under Article 4.A.5.b., a full tour at his new unit was four years. 
and the applicant was to report to the new unit on June 15, 1998.  On April 30, 1998, 
ALDIST 046/98 was in effect and it authorized a Zone A SRB with a multiple of 1 for 
BM3s.  There is no “page 7” in the applicant’s record documenting SRB counseling at 
the  time.2    The  page  7  would  have  informed  him  that  he  was  eligible  to  reenlist  or 
extend  his  enlistment  for  up  to  six  years  to  receive  a  maximum  SRB.    However,  the 
applicant’s extension contract contained the following language: 
 

SRB ELIGIBILITY ACKNOWLEDGMENT 

 
I  have  been  provided  with  a  copy  [of]  “SRB  Questions  and  Answers” 
based on Commandant Instruction 7220.33 (series).  I have been informed 
that:  My current Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) multiple under Zone   
A   is   01   and is listed in ALDIST    046/98 , which  has been made 
available for review.  I further understand the eligibility requirements for 
Zone A, B, and C SRB’s and that the maximum SRB paid to my current 

                                                 
2 Paragraph 2 of Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33, which was in effect in 1998 and contained the SRB 
regulations, states that “[a]ll personnel with 14 years or less active service who reenlist or extend for any 
period, however brief, shall be counseled on the SRB program.  They shall sign a page 7 [CG-3307] service 
record entry, enclosure (3), outlining the effect that particular action has on their SRB entitlement.”  On 
the CG-3307, which is Enclosure (3) to the instruction, the  member also acknowledges  having received 
and reviewed a copy of COMDTINST 7220.33. 

pay  grade  is  $     35,000    .    My  SRB  will  be  computed  based  on     37   
months newly obligated service.[3] 

 

EFFECT OF EXTENSION/REEXTENSION ON SRB ENTITLEMENT 

 
I fully understand the effect my extension/reextension will have upon my 
current  and  future  SRB  eligibility.    I  understand  that  continued  entitle-
ment to unpaid installments may be terminated and a prorated portion of 
advance bonus payments recouped if I am considered not to be technically 
qualified or unable to perform the duties of the rating for which the bonus 
was  paid,  in  accordance  with  COMDTINST  7220.33  (series).    I  further 
acknowledge  that  I  have  been  given  the  chance  to  review  COMDTINST 
7220.33  (series)  concerning  my  eligibility  for  SRB  and  have  had  all  my 
questions answered. 

 
 
On  May  22,  1999,  the  applicant’s  37-month  extension  contract  went  into  effect, 
but he was never paid the Zone A SRB noted on the contract.  On September 1, 2000, the 
applicant was advanced to BM2.   
 

On  May  22,  2001,  the  applicant’s  sixth  anniversary  on  active  duty,4  ALCOAST 
127/01 was in effect and it authorized a Zone A multiple of 1.5 for BM2s who signed 
reenlistment  or  extension  contracts  between  May  1,  2001,  and  January  31,  2002.    It 
authorized no Zone B SRB multiple for BM2s from May 1 through September 30, 2001, 
but a multiple of 1.0 for BM2s who reenlisted or extended their enlistments from Octo-
ber 1, 2001, through January 31, 2002. 
 

Because  funding  for  SRBs  was  short  and  some  SRB  multiples  could  not  be 
authorized for certain critical ratings from May 1 through September 30, 2001, the Com-
mandant also issued ALCOAST 198/01, which allowed members whose sixth or tenth 
anniversaries fell between May 1 and September 30, 2001, to wait to reenlist until Octo-
ber  2001.    In  such  cases,  ALCOAST  198/01  provided,  the  members  who  waited  until 
October  2001  would  receive  the  SRB  that  they  would  have  received  on  their  actual 
anniversaries as if the SRB multiple in effect after October 1, 2001, had been in effect on 
their anniversaries. 
 

                                                 
3 Paragraph 3.f. of Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33 states that an SRB is calculated by multiplying 
the  “multiple”  authorized  for  the  member’s  rating  by  his  monthly  basic  pay  and  by  the  number  of 
months of “newly obligated service” under the contract and dividing that figure by 12. 
4 On a member’s sixth active duty anniversary, the member is eligible to reenlist for either a Zone A or a 
Zone B SRB if one is authorized for his rating and the member has not already received one.  The member 
must  be  counseled  about  this  opportunity,  and  the  counseling  must  be  documented  on  a  page  7.  
COMDTINST 7220.33, Enclosure (1), Para. 3.d. 

The  applicant’s  record  does  not  contain  a  page  7  documenting  SRB  counseling 

 
upon his sixth anniversary.   
 

On October 1, 2001, the applicant reenlisted for six years.  His reenlistment con-
tract  shows  that  he  was  promised  a  Zone  B  SRB  with  a  multiple  of  one  for  this 
reenlistment.   
 
 
The  applicant’s  tenth  active  duty  anniversary  was  May  22,  2005.    ALCOAST 
306/04 authorized a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 2.5 for boatswain’s mates on that 
date.  However, because the applicant had already received a Zone B SRB, he was not 
eligible for another. 

 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

On October 5, 2005, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard rec-

ommended that the Board deny the requested relief but grant alternate relief.   

 
The JAG stated that the applicant was inexplicably never paid the Zone A SRB he 
was promised and entitled to upon signing the 37-month extension contract in 1998.  He 
recommended that the Board order the Coast Guard to pay that SRB.  The JAG argued 
that this proposed relief would bring the “result that most closely represents the bar-
gain”  that  the  applicant  made.    The  JAG  argued  that  the  relief  recommended  by  the 
applicant would be an inappropriate remedy. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On October 14, 2005, the applicant responded to the views of the Coast Guard.  
He disagreed with the JAG’s recommendation.  He stated that if he had been properly 
counseled about SRBs in 1988, he would have made different decisions.  He alleged that 
when he signed the extension contract in 1998, he 
 

was  completely  unaware  of  what  it  actually  was.    I  was  never  in  the 
understanding that I was entitled to an SRB and believed the statement on 
the contract was a standard remark.  I did not receive any payments and 
had  I  been  aware  that  I  should  have  received  money,  I  can  confidently 
say,  I  would  have  extended  or  even  reenlisted  for  the  full  six  years  to 
maximize  any  bonus  I  would  get.    At  the  time  of  signing  the  extension 
contract,  my  wife  was  pregnant  with  our  second  child  and  I  was 
transferring.  The overall lack of SRB counseling I have had in my career I 
believe  to  be  a  great  monetary  loss  to  myself,  as  well  as  my  family.  
Further, I would like to add, when I did reenlist for 6 years in 2001, the 
PERSRU  who  did  my  paperwork  never  bothered  to  look  up  whether  or 
not I had or had not received a Zone A SRB.  Rather, it was assumed I did 

because it was typed up on the extension contract as if I had.  My records 
also show no documentation of proper counseling at that time either.  If 
the  PERSRU  had  looked  into  it,  I  would  have  submitted  [an  application 
for] correction to my record then. 

 
 
The  applicant  concluded  that  the  Board  should  correct  his  record to  show  that 
the  SRB  he  received  on  October  1,  2001,  was  a  Zone  A  bonus,  and  to  show  that  he 
reenlisted for six years on his tenth anniversary for a Zone B bonus. 
 

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 over this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.  

As the applicant remains of active duty, the application was timely.5  
 

2. 

 The applicant alleged that when he signed the extension contract on April 
30, 1998, he was not told and did not realize that he was eligible for an SRB.  The exten-
sion  contract  itself  states  that  he  would  be  receiving  an  SRB  based  on  37  months  of 
newly obligated service.  The applicant’s allegation, however, is supported by the fact 
that he was never paid the SRB; he never complained about not receiving the SRB; and 
there is no page 7 in his record documenting SRB counseling.  The Board finds that the 
preponderance of the evidence in the record indicates that the applicant did not know 
and was not told in 1998 that the extension contract would entitle him to an SRB. 

 
3. 

The applicant alleged that if he had been told about the SRB in 1998, he 
would have extended his enlistment for the maximum time and he would have com-
plained  about  not  receiving  the  SRB.    If  the  applicant  had  been  properly  counseled 
about  SRBs  with  a  page  7,  as  was  required  by  COMDTINST  7220.33,  he  would  have 
been  informed  that  he  could  reenlist  or  extend  his  enlistment  for  up  to  six  years  to 
maximize his SRB.  He noted that at the time, his family was moving pursuant to his 
transfer, and his wife was pregnant with their second child.  Given these facts and the 
lack of a completed page 7 in his record, the Board finds that the preponderance of the 
evidence in the record indicates that when he signed the extension contract on April 30, 
1998, the applicant did not know that he could extend his enlistment for up to six years 
to  maximize  his  SRB  and  that,  if  he  had  known,  he  would  have  done  so.    Such  a 
decision would be typical of members in the applicant’s situation. 
                                                 
5 Detweiler v. Pena, 38 F.3d 591, 598 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (holding that section 205 of the Soldiers’ and Sailors’ 
Civil Relief Act of 1940 “tolls the BCMR’s limitations period during a servicemember’s period of active 
duty”). 
 

4. 

6. 

5. 

 
 
The applicant asked the Board to ignore the fact that his 37-month exten-
sion, which was required for his transfer, entitled him to a Zone A SRB and to pay him 
instead for a Zone A SRB on his sixth anniversary.  However, when the Board discovers 
an  error  in  a  member’s  record,  the  Board’s  policy  is  not  to  grant  whatever  relief  is 
requested but to put the member back into the position he would have been in had no 
error been made.  In this case, the Board finds that, had the Coast Guard properly coun-
seled  the  applicant  about  his  eligibility  for  an  SRB  with  a  page  7,  he  would  have 
extended his enlistment for six years on April 30, 1998, to maximize his SRB.  Although 
the JAG recommended that the Board simply order the Coast Guard to pay the appli-
cant the SRB for the 37-month extension, this recommendation ignores the fact that the 
applicant was not counseled in 1998 about his eligibility to extend his enlistment for up 
to six years.  Therefore, the Board finds that the applicant’s record should be corrected 
to show that on April 30, 1998, he extended his enlistment for six years, or 72 months, 
instead of 37 months. 
 
 
If  the  applicant  had  extended  his  enlistment  for  six  years  on  April  30, 
1998, his end of enlistment date would have been extended from May 21, 1999, to May 
21, 2005.  Therefore, it is unlikely that he would have reenlisted on his sixth anniversary 
or  on  October  1,  2001,  when  so  much  obligated  service  remained  on  his  previous 
contract.    However, on  May  22,  2005,  his  tenth  anniversary  on  active  duty,  he  would 
have been eligible to reenlist for six years for a Zone B SRB.  Therefore, the Board finds 
that the applicant’s October 1, 2001, reenlistment contract should be removed from his 
record as null and void, and the applicant should be reenlisted for six years on his tenth 
active duty anniversary for a Zone B SRB, as he requested. 
 
 
Accordingly, partial relief should be granted by correcting the term of the 
applicant’s 37-month extension contract to 72 months; by voiding his October 1, 2001, 
reenlistment contract; and by reenlisting him for six years on his tenth active duty anni-
versary.  In accordance with paragraph 4 of Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33, the 
Coast Guard will be entitled to recoup the Zone B SRB that the applicant received for 
reenlisting on October 1, 2001. 
 
 
 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] 

The  application  of  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his 

ORDER 

 

military record is granted in part as follows: 
 
 
 

The Coast Guard shall correct his record to show that  

(1)  on  April  30,  1998,  he  extended  his  enlistment  for  72  months,  instead  of  37 

months, for a Zone A SRB; 

(2)  his reenlistment contract dated October 1, 2001, is null and void; and 
(3)  on his tenth anniversary on active duty, he reenlisted for six years for a Zone 

B SRB.  

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

The Coast Guard shall pay him any amount he is due under ALDIST 046/98 and 
ALCOAST  306/04  as  a  result  of  these  corrections,  minus  any  amount  that  must  be 
recouped due to the voiding of his October 1, 2001, reenlistment contract. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 Frank H. Esposito 

 
 William R. Kraus 

        

 

 
 Jordan S. Fried