DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket No. 2005-165
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX.
Xxx xxx xxxxx, EM1
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. The case was docketed on September 9, 2005,
upon receipt of the applicant’s completed application.
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
This final decision, dated June 1, 2006, is signed by the three duly appointed
APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS
The applicant, an electrician’s mate first class (EM1), asked the Board to correct
the term of an extension contract that she signed on January 20, 2000, from 2 years to 1
year, 5 months. The applicant stated that in January 2000 she was told that she would
need to obligate an additional 2 years of service prior to reporting to EM “A” school.1
She alleged that “I obligated too much service for EM class ‘A’ school” and alleged that
she was only required to obligate an additional 1 year, 5 months of additional service.
In addition, the applicant alleged that she was not counseled regarding her
eligibility for an SRB when she signed an extension contract on April 30, 2002, to accept
transfer orders. The applicant asked the Board to replace that 2-year, 6-month
extension contract with a 4-year reenlistment contract so she can receive a Zone A SRB.
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
1 “A” school is where Coast Guard members receive training for their specific rating.
On July 15, 1996, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard for a term of 4 years,
through July 14, 2000. On November 30, 1998, the applicant extended her enlistment for
5 months to obligate service for transfer, with a new end of enlistment (EOE) date of
December 14, 2000. On January 20, 2000, the applicant signed a 2-year extension
contract to obligate sufficient service to attend EM “A” school, with an adjusted EOE
date of December 14, 2002. The applicant was advanced to EM3 upon graduating from
“A” school on May 5, 2000. On April 30, 2002, the applicant signed a 2-year, 6-month
extension contract to obligate sufficient service to accept transfer orders. The applicant
reached her 6th active duty anniversary on July 15, 2002. There is no page 7 entry2 in the
record to indicate that she received SRB counseling on either April 30, 2002, or on her
6th anniversary. The applicant advanced to EM2 on June 1, 2003, and to EM1 on
February 1, 2005. On February 2, 2005, she signed a 6-year reenlistment contract to
receive a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 3 pursuant to ALCOAST 306/04.
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On January 20, 2006, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard
submitted an advisory opinion in which he recommended granting relief. He stated
that the record supports the applicant’s allegations that she was never counseled about
her opportunities to reenlist for a Zone A SRB. The JAG did not address the applicant’s
allegation that she obligated too much service to attend EM “A” school in January 2000.
RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On January 25, 2006, the Chair sent the applicant a copy of the JAG’s advisory
opinion and invited her to respond. The Chair did not receive a response.
APPLICABLE LAW
Chapter 2.A.11. of the Coast Guard Training and Education Manual provides
that a member shall reenlist or extend their enlistment to cover the period of obligated
service remaining upon graduation from “A” school. Figure 2-1 indicates that EM “A”
school is 14 weeks long, and Figure 2-2 indicates that upon graduation members must
have at least 26 months remaining on their enlistments.
Article 3.C.3. of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual requires that all personnel
with 10 years or less of active service who reenlist or extend for any period shall be
counseled on the SRB program and shall sign a page 7 outlining the effect that
particular action has on their SRB entitlement.
2 A page 7 (CG-3307) documents any counseling that is provided to a service member as well as any
other noteworthy events that occur during that member’s military career.
Article 3.C.11.2. of the Personnel Manual requires that a page 7 entry regarding
counseling about SRB eligibility be made in a member’s record within 3 months of his
or her 6th and 10th anniversaries.
ALCOAST 585/01 was issued on December 20, 2001, and was in effect from
February 1, 2002, through August 4, 2002. Under ALCOAST 585/01, EM3s were
eligible for an SRB calculated with a multiple of 1.5.
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:
1.
The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C.
§ 1552. The application was timely.
2.
The applicant alleged that she was erroneously counseled to extend her
enlistment for 24 months to obligate sufficient additional service prior to reporting to
EM “A” school in January 2000. The Board agrees. If the applicant had been properly
counseled, she would have been told that, under Chapter 2.A.11. 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. This correction will reduce the amount of
previously obligated service she has upon reenlistment on April 30, 2002 (see below),
and thus increases her subsequent Zone A SRB.
3.
The applicant also alleged that she was not counseled regarding her
eligibility for an SRB when she signed an extension contract on April 30, 2002. She
asked the Board to void the extension contract and replace it with a 4-year reenlistment
so she can receive a Zone A SRB. Under Article 3.C. of the Personnel Manual, the
applicant was entitled to proper counseling concerning her eligibility for a Zone A SRB
when she signed a 2-year, 6-month extension contract on April 30, 2002. There is no
page 7 entry in the record to indicate that she received the mandatory SRB counseling.
The Board finds that if the applicant had been properly counseled regarding her SRB
eligibility, then she likely would have signed at least a 3-year reenlistment contract to
receive an SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 585/01. The Board notes that the applicant
requested that her April 30, 2002, extension contract be replaced with a 4-year
3 The applicant needed 26 months of obligated service when she graduated on April 20, 2000. The
applicant had already obligated service through December 14, 2000. Thus, she needed to obligate an
additional 19 months.
reenlistment contract. However, a 4-year contract would reduce the Zone B SRB that
she received for her February 2005 reenlistment by nearly 15 months of previously
obligated service. As the SRB multiple for the February 2005 contract is twice that of
the multiple authorized for EMs in Zone A in April 2002, it is in the applicant’s
pecuniary interest to replace the April 30, 2002, extension contract with the minimum
allowable 3-year reenlistment contract instead of a 4-year contract.
4.
In light of the record and the JAG’s recommendation, the term of the
applicant’s January 20, 2000, extension contract should be corrected from 24 months (2
years) to 19 months. In addition, the applicant’s April 30, 2002, extension contract
should be removed from her record as null and void and replaced with a 3-year
reenlistment contract so that she may receive a Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST
585/01.
ORDER
The application of EM1 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of her military
record is granted. The Coast Guard shall correct the term of her January 20, 2000,
extension contract from 24 months (2 years) to 19 months. In addition, the Coast Guard
shall remove the April 30, 2002, extension contract from her record as null and void and
replace it with a 3-year reenlistment contract dated April 30, 2002. The Coast Guard
shall pay her any amount due pursuant to ALCOAST 585/01 and ALCOAST 306/04 as
a result of this correction.
Elizabeth F. Buchanan
Randall J. Kaplan
Audrey Roh
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 To be eligible for a Zone B SRB, a member must have completed “at least 6 years but not more than 10 years of active service on the date of reenlistment or operative date of the extension.” Coast Guard Personnel Manual, Article 3.C.4.b.3. He stated that upon receiving transfer orders to the Coast Guard Integrated Support Command (ISC) and the Coast Guard Cutter Healy in Seattle, he was counseled by a Coast Guard yeoman1 that he was eligible to reenlist or extend for up to six years for a...
of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member cannot have previously received a Zone A SRB. The counseling was erroneous because the applicant received a Zone A SRB for his September 22, 2001, reenlistment, and pursuant to Article 3.C.4.a.6. Therefore, the Board finds that if the applicant had received proper SRB counseling in accordance with Article 3.C.3., he would have (a) extended his enlistment for 23 months instead of reenlisting in July 2003 and...
This final decision, dated February 19, 2003, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record so that he would receive a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for the full 72 months (six years) for which he reen- listed on July 18, 2002. 2002-098 p. 2 celed the extension contract, it would still count as previously obligated service and reduce his SRB by almost half: if he reenlisted in September 2002 before the...
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...
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...
This final decision, dated November 17, 2005, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his military record by replacing his six- year reenlistment contract with a six-year extension contract so that he will receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 calculated with 72 months of newly obli- gated service instead of 52 months. Enclosure (1) to COMDTINST 7220.33 states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member must...
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD On April 25, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s request.2 The Chief Counsel stated that the “Coast Guard concedes that this Applicant met the eligibility criteria for an SRB at the time he reenlisted on 1 July, 2002.” The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant was eligible for the SRB because he “reenlisted within 3 months after the end of his enlistment/date after separation from active duty and...
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...
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...