DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2007-157 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
 
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 Chair docketed the case on July 13, 2007, upon receipt of 
the applicant’s completed application, and assigned it to staff members D. Hale and J. Andrews 
to prepare the decision for the Board as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  March  13,  2008,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant, an operations specialist second class (OS2), asked the Board to correct his 
record to show that he is eligible to receive a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB)1 for 
signing a six-year enlistment/reenlistment contract on April 1, 2007.  He stated that on that date, 
he was a reservist serving on twelve-month active duty orders under Title 10.  The orders ran 
from October 1, 2006, to September 30, 2007.  He alleged that he was counseled that he was 
eligible to receive an SRB if he integrated into the regular Coast Guard at any point during the 
term of his Title 10 orders.  This counseling was documented on a Page 7,2 and the promised 
SRB  was  noted  on  the  enlistment/reenlistment  contract  he  signed  to  integrate  into  the  regular 
Coast Guard on April 1, 2007.  However, the Coast Guard denied his SRB on May 15, 2007, 
citing Article 1.G.1.a. of the Personnel Manual.  Article 1.G.1.a. requires reservists serving on 
active duty to complete at least twelve months of continuous active duty before their subsequent 

                                                 
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.  Coast Guard members who have at 
least 21 months but no more than 6 years of active duty service are in “Zone A,” while those who have more than 6 
but less than 10 years of active duty service are in “Zone B.”  Members may not receive more than one SRB per 
zone.  Personnel Manual, Article 3.C.  
2  A  Page  7  (CG-3307,  or  Administrative  Remarks)  entry  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. 

enlistment in the regular Coast Guard counts as a reenlistment on active duty.  Because he had 
completed just six months of continuous active duty on April 1, 2007, instead of twelve months, 
he did not receive the promised SRB. 
 

The applicant alleged that if he had been told that he would not be eligible for the SRB 
until October 1, 2007—when his twelve-month Title 10 active duty orders were due to expire—
he  would  have  remained  a  reservist  and  completed  his  year  of  active  duty  under  the  Title  10 
orders and then integrated into the regular Coast Guard on October 1, 2007, for the SRB.  If he 
had been told he could not do this, he would have enlisted for four years instead of six so that he 
would at least become eligible for an SRB sooner. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

On July 15, 2005, the applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve for a term of four 
years, through July 14, 2009.  He had previously served on active duty in the U.S. Army from 
May 30, 1996, through October 9, 1998, and was a member of the Army Reserve from October 
10, 1998, through January 26, 2004.   

 
On October 1, 2006, the applicant was recalled to active duty in the Coast Guard Reserve 
under Title 10.  On February 16, 2007, the Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) granted his 
request  to  integrate  into  the  regular  Coast  Guard.    CGPC  authorized  the  applicant  to  be  dis-
charged from the Reserve and enlisted in the regular Coast Guard on April 1, 2007, for a period 
of four years.  On April 1, 2007, the applicant integrated into the regular Coast Guard by signing 
an  “Enlistment/Reenlistment  Document”  (DD  Form  4/1)  for  a  six-year  term  running  through 
March 31, 2013.  The contract states that he is “entitled to a SRB bonus multiple of 1.5 for 72 
months  of  newly  obligated  service.”    On  the  same  day,  a  Page  7  was  placed  in  his  record  to 
document that he was counseled that he was eligible to reenlist for six years for an SRB pursuant 
to ALCOAST 283/06. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

 

On December 4, 2007, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted 
an advisory opinion in which he recommended denying relief.  The JAG stated that the Coast 
Guard needed to complete a statement of creditable service (SOCS)3 to determine the applicant’s 
active duty base date (ADBD)4 before it could make any decision regarding the applicant’s SRB 
eligibility.   

 
On February 19, 2008, the JAG submitted a supplemental advisory opinion in which he 
recommended that the Board deny the relief requested but grant alternate relief.  The JAG stated 
that the applicant is not eligible to receive an SRB for reenlisting on April 1, 2007, because on 
that date he had never previously enlisted in the regular Coast Guard and he had served only five 
months on extended active duty under Title 10.  Therefore, under Article 1.G.1.a. of the Person-

                                                 
3 A Statement of Creditable Service verifies and validates all periods of prior military service (all branches) and sea 
service to adjust a member’s Pay Base Date (PBD), Active Duty Base Date (ADBD), or cumulative sea service time.  
Chapter 2.A. of the Coast Guard Pay Manual. 
4 A member’s active duty base date is the date the member entered active duty for pay purposes. 

nel  Manual,  the  contract  he  signed  on  April  1,  2007,  is  an  enlistment  contract,  rather  than  a 
reenlistment contract.  The JAG further stated that the Page 7 and contract dated April 1, 2007, in 
the applicant’s record are erroneous in that they indicate that he was eligible for an SRB.   
 

The JAG recommended that the Board grant alternate relief by offering the applicant the 
choice  of  voiding  his  April  1,  2007,  enlistment  contract  and  being  discharged,  or  having  his 
record corrected by deleting the errors on his enlistment contract to show that on April 1, 2007, 
he was eligible to enlist for a term of four years but was not eligible to receive an SRB. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSES TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  December  11,  2007,  the  applicant  submitted  his  response  to  the  original  advisory 
opinion of the Coast Guard.  He disagreed with the recommendation therein, stating that when 
his request to integrate from the Reserve into the regular Coast Guard was approved, he “was 
assured that everything had been taken care of regarding my prior service time being credited and 
was shown in the Coast Guard Personnel Manual M1000.6A, Article 3.C.4.a, that all criteria for 
a Zone A SRB had been met.”  In further correspondence, he stated that the promise of an SRB 
was a significant factor in his decision to reenlist for six years, and that if he had known that he 
was not eligible for an SRB, he would have reenlisted for only four years.    
 
 
On February 26, 2008, the applicant responded to the supplemental advisory opinion.  He 
disagreed with the JAG’s recommendation and stated that when he inquired about integration, he 
was told that he could request it at any time as long as his Title 10 orders had not yet expired.  In 
addition, he was told that he was eligible to reenlist for six years and that he met all of the eligi-
bility requirements for an SRB under Article 3.C.4.a. of the Personnel Manual.  He alleged that 
Article 3.C.4.a. only required him to have served at least seventeen months on continuous active 
duty at any point in his military career and that he had met this criterion by serving more than 
seventeen  months  on  continuous  active  duty  in  the  Army.    The  applicant  stated  that  after  the 
initial payment of his SRB was denied, the yeoman at his unit “was not able to find any docu-
mentation that showed the amount of time that must be served while on Title 10 orders.”   
 

APPLICABLE LAW 

 

Article  1.G.1.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  is  titled  “Definition  of  Reenlistment.”    Article 
1.G.1.a. states that a “reenlistment” on active duty is “the enlistment of any person who has pre-
viously served in the Regular Coast Guard shall be considered 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 twelve months or more shall be considered a reenlistment.” 
 
 
criteria: 
 

Article 3.C.4.a. states that to receive a Zone A SRB, the member must meet the following 

1.  Reenlist not later than 3 months after discharge or release from active duty in a rating authorized 

an SRB multiple. 

2.  Have completed 17 months continuous active duty (including extended active duty as a Reserve) at 
any point in their military career.  The 17 months continuous active duty need not have been com-
pleted immediately prior to the reenlistment or extension. 

3.  Have completed not more than 6 years active service on the date of reenlistment or the date on 

which the extension becomes operative. 

4.  Be serving in pay grade E-3 or higher on active duty in a rating that is designated as eligible for an 

SRB multiple. 

5.  Reenlist or extend enlistment in the Regular Coast Guard for a period of at least 3 full years. 
6.  Have not previously received a Zone A SRB. 
7.  Attain eligibility prior to the termination of a multiple for that particular rating. 
8.  Meet any additional eligibility criteria the Commandant may prescribe. 

 

Article  3.C.3.  requires  that  all  personnel  with  ten  years  or  less  of  active  service  who 
reenlist for any period be counseled on the SRB program and sign a Page 7 outlining the effect 
that their reenlistment will have on their SRB entitlement. 
 

ALCOAST 283/06 was issued on May 15, 2006, and was in effect from July 1, 2006, 
through July 15, 2007.  Under ALCOAST 283/06, OS2s were eligible for a Zone A SRB calcu-
lated with a multiple of 1.5.  The next SRB authorization, ALCOAST 304/07, which went into 
effect on July 16, 2007, and was still in effect on October 1, 2007, did not authorize a Zone A 
SRB for members in the OS rating. 
  

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 applicable law: 
 
 
The application was timely filed. 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552.   

1. 

 
2. 

 
3. 

The JAG recommended that the Board deny the requested relief because, under to 
Article 1.G.1.a. of the Personnel Manual, his contract was an enlistment contract, rather than a 
reenlistment contract, because on April 1, 2007, he had never previously enlisted in the regular 
Coast  Guard  and  he  had  not  served  on  extended  active  duty  as  a  reservist  for  at  least  twelve 
months.  The applicant stated that he was never told about this requirement, which is not listed 
with the SRB eligibility criteria under Article 3.C.4.a. of the Personnel Manual.  He alleged that 
he  was  told  that  he  could  receive  an  SRB  by  reenlisting  for  six  years  on  April  1,  2007.    His 
record  supports  his  allegation  as  it  contains  both  a  DD  Form  4/1  “Enlistment/Reenlistment 
Document” and a Page 7 dated April 1, 2007, stating that he was eligible for an SRB. 

Under Article 3.C.4.a. of the Personnel Manual, only members who reenlist (or 
extend  an  enlistment)  for  at  least  three  years  are  eligible  for  a  selective  reenlistment  bonus 
(SRB).    Article  1.G.1.a.  defines  a  “reenlistment”  on  active duty as the enlistment of someone 
who has previously enlisted in the regular Coast Guard or the enlistment into the regular Coast 
Guard of a Coast Guard reservist who is serving on continuous active duty and has been doing so 
for at least twelve months.  On April 1, 2007, the applicant was a reservist who had been serving 
on  active  duty  for  only  six  months.    Thus, the DD Form 4/1 “Enlistment/Reenlistment Docu-
ment” he signed that day was not a reenlistment contract but an enlistment contract.  Therefore, 
the  notation  on  that  contract  stating  that  he  was  eligible  for  an  SRB  and  the  SRB  counseling 
documented on the Page 7 are clearly erroneous. 
 

4. 

The applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he was errone-
ously promised an SRB for signing a six-year enlistment contract on April 1, 2007.  Although the 
applicant asked to be paid the SRB he was erroneously promised, when an applicant proves that 
he has received erroneous SRB counseling, the Board’s policy is not to offend the regulations by 
fulfilling the erroneous promise, but to return the applicant to the position he would have been in 
had he been properly counseled.5   

 The applicant alleged that if he had known that he would not be eligible for an 
SRB until October 1, 2007, he would have waited until his Title 10 active duty orders expired on 
that  date  and  reenlisted  for  an  SRB.    However,  by  October  1,  2007,  ALCOAST  283/06  had 
expired, and the new SRB authorization, ALCOAST 304/07, did not authorize an SRB multiple 
for members in the OS rating.  Therefore, by the time a contract signed by the applicant would 
count as a reenlistment contract, in accordance with the definition of “reenlistment” under Article 
1.G.1.a. of the Personnel Manual, his rating was no longer authorized an SRB. 

The applicant stated that if he had known he could not get an SRB for integrating 
in the Coast Guard, he might have signed only a four-year contract with the hope of becoming 
eligible for an SRB at a later date, such as his sixth anniversary on active duty, October 5, 2009.  
The Coast Guard stated that the contract is voidable because of the erroneous promise of the SRB 
and that the Board should offer the applicant the options of being expeditiously discharged or 
having the term of his enlistment changed from six years to four years.   

The Board agrees with the Coast Guard that the enlistment contract is voidable 
because of the erroneously promised SRB.  If the applicant had been properly counseled on April 
1, 2007, he might have remained a reservist serving on Title 10 active duty orders or he might 
have enlisted for four years, instead of six.  Therefore, the Board finds that he should be able to 
choose either of these options after receiving counseling about them. 
 

Accordingly, partial relief should be granted.  After counseling the applicant about 

his options under the Board’s order, the Coast Guard should offer him the following options:   

 
6. 

 
7. 

  
5. 

  
8. 

 

(a) Correct  the  term  of  his  April  1,  2007,  enlistment  contract  from  six  to  four 

years and remove the notation regarding his entitlement to an SRB; or 

(b) Remove  his  April  1,  2007,  enlistment  contract  as  null  and  void,  be  expedi-
tiously  released  from  active  duty,  and  correct  his  record  to  show  that  he 
remained a reservist serving on active duty under Title 10 orders from October 
1, 2006, to the date of his expeditious discharge.6 

 

                                                 
5 See Denton v. United States, 204 Ct. Cl. 188, 199-200 (1975) (stating that under Kimmel v. United States, 196 Ct. 
Cl. 579 (1971), a BCMR applicant is entitled to “nothing more than placement in the same position he would have 
been had no error been made”). 
6  The  Board  notes  that  no  SRB  multiple  is  currently  authorized  for  members  in  the  OS  rating  under  ALCOAST 
304/07 but that if one is authorized by the time the Board’s order is implemented in this case and if the applicant 
chooses option (b), he might then be eligible to reenlist for an SRB. 

ORDER 

 

 

The  application  of  OS2  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his  military 
record  is  granted in part as follows:  Within ninety (90) days of the date of this decision, the 
Coast Guard shall counsel him about his options under this order and, at his discretion, correct 
his record by either 

 
(a) correcting the term of his April 1, 2007, enlistment contract (DD Form 4/1) to show 
four  years,  instead  of  six  years,  and  removing  from  block  8.b.  the  comment 
concerning his entitlement to an SRB; or 

(b) removing  the  April  1,  2007,  enlistment  contract  as  null  and  void,  expeditiously 
releasing him from active duty, and correcting his record to show that he remained a 
reservist serving on Title 10 active duty orders from October 1, 2006, to the date of 
his expeditious release from active duty pursuant to this order. 

   
If  after  counseling  he  makes  no  election  pursuant  to  this  order,  his  record  shall  be 

 
 

corrected as stated in option (a), above. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 Charles P. Kielkopf 

 

 

 
 Kenneth Walton 

 

 

 
 
 Eric J. Young