DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                        BCMR Docket No. 2007-210 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

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 September 13, 2007, upon 
receipt of the applicant’s completed application, and assigned it to staff member 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  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 SRBs on the anniversaries.  He alleged that he had never been advised of his eligibility 
for the SRBs and that if he had been, he would have reenlisted to receive them.  The applicant 
stated that his command failed to timely counsel him about his SRB eligibility on his anniversa-
ries because, although he had served in the Coast Guard from October 31, 1995, to August 30, 
2000, when he reenlisted on September 4, 2001, his recruiter failed to complete his enlistment 
forms properly to show his prior active service.  Therefore, his active duty anniversary date was 
incorrectly calculated in the Coast Guard’s database. 
 
 
The applicant further explained that when he reenlisted on May 26, 2004, he was told that 
he would receive a Zone A SRB.  He received his bonus payments and never knew that he was 
being paid a Zone B SRB, instead of a Zone A SRB, because his Leave and Earnings Statements 
(copies of which he submitted) showed the payments as “bonus payments” without identifying 
                                                 
1 SRBs vary according to the length of each member’s active duty service, the length of the period of reenlistment or 
extension of enlistment, and the need of the Coast Guard for personnel with the member’s particular skills, which is 
reflected in the multiple used to calculate the SRB as announced in an ALCOAST.  Coast Guard members who have 
served less than six years on active duty are in Zone A.  Those who have more than six and up to ten years of active 
duty are in Zone B.  Members may receive only one SRB per zone.  Personnel Manual, Article 3.C.4. 

the zone.  He did not learn of the switch until 2006 when his unit’s yeoman inquired about his 
eligibility  for  a  Zone  B  SRB.    She  was  told  that  he  was  not  eligible  for  one  because  he  had 
already received a Zone B SRB and only one SRB per zone is authorized.  Further investigation 
revealed that in June 2004, the Personnel Services Center had prepared a Statement of Creditable 
Service and determined that on May 26, 2004, he had more than six years of active duty and was 
in Zone B.  As a result, they paid him a Zone B SRB in lieu of a Zone A SRB without ever 
advising him of the switch. 
 
 
The applicant stated that because of the miscalculation of his active duty anniversary in 
the Coast Guard’s database, he was not timely counseled about his eligibility for a Zone A SRB 
on his sixth anniversary, as required by regulation.  If he had been timely counseled, he would 
have reenlisted on his sixth anniversary and would not have needed to reenlist again until his 
tenth anniversary, when he was eligible for a Zone B SRB.  As his record currently stands, he has 
missed his opportunity for a Zone A SRB because he was not counseled on his sixth anniversary. 
 
 
In support of his allegation, the applicant submitted a statement from his current yeoman 
supporting his claims and calculating his potential Zone A and Zone B SRBs.  The statement 
recommends that the Board correct the applicant’s record to show that he reenlisted for six years 
on his sixth anniversary. 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 

On  October  31,  1995,  the  applicant  enlisted  on  active  duty  in  the  Coast  Guard.    On 

 
 
August 30, 2000, he was released to the Reserve with four years and ten months of active duty. 
 

On  September  4,  2001,  the  applicant  reenlisted  for  four  years,  through  September  3, 
2005, as a third class gunner’s mate (GM3/E-4).  On May 1, 2002, he advanced to GM2/E-5.  On 
June 1, 2003, he advanced to GM1/E-6. 

 
On May 26, 2004, the applicant reenlisted for six years, through May 25, 2010, to receive 
an SRB.  In addition to his reenlistment contract, he and his unit’s chief yeoman both signed a 
form CG-3307 (“Page 7”) in which the applicant was advised that in accordance with ALCOAST 
182/03,  he was eligible for a Zone A SRB  calculated with a multiple of 2.5 and based on 56 
months of newly obligated service.  (There were still 16 months of previously obligated service 
remaining to run on his September 4, 2001, reenlistment contract, and SRBs are paid only for 
months of newly obligated service.) 

 
On June 18, 2004, the Personnel Services Center prepared a Statement of Creditable Ser-
vice for the applicant and determined that his active duty base date is November 4, 1996, which 
is four years and ten months prior to his September 4, 2001, reentry on active duty.  Therefore, 
the applicant’s sixth active duty anniversary was November 4, 2002.  The applicant’s record does 
not contain a Page 7 documenting SRB counseling on his sixth anniversary. 

 
The  applicant’s  Leave  and  Earnings  Statements  show  that  he  received  an  SRB  for  his 

May 26, 2004, reenlistment, but they do not show whether it was a Zone A or Zone B SRB.   

 

On November 1, 2006, the applicant reenlisted for six years.  However, he did not receive 
a Zone B SRB because the Coast Guard determined that the SRB he had received for reenlisting 
on May 26, 2004, was a Zone B SRB. 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 

On February 1, 2008, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted 
an advisory opinion and recommended that the Board grant the relief requested.  The JAG stated 
that the Page 7 in the applicant’s record proves that he was told on May 26, 2004, that he was 
reenlisting for a Zone A SRB even though his sixth anniversary had passed.  The JAG stated that 
under Article 3.C.5.9. of the Personnel Manual, the applicant was eligible for a Zone A SRB on 
his sixth anniversary and should have been counseled about it.  The JAG recommended that the 
Board reenlist the applicant for four years on his sixth anniversary for a Zone A SRB and void 
his May 26, 2004, SRB so that he will be eligible for a Zone B SRB for his November 1, 2006, 
reenlistment. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
On February 13, 2008, the applicant responded to the JAG’s advisory opinion, stating that 
 
he had no objection to the JAG’s recommendation for relief.  The BCMR staff called the appli-
cant  to  determine  whether  he  still  wanted  a  six-year  reenlistment  on  his  sixth  anniversary,  as 
stated in his application, or the four-year reenlistment recommended by the JAG.  The applicant 
stated that he was uncertain which would be in his best interest. 

 

 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

Article 1.G.2.A. of the Personnel Manual provides that members who have less than ten 
years of active service are allowed to reenlist for periods of three, four, five, or six years.  Article 
3.C.5.9. of the Personnel Manual states that  

 
Commanding  officers  are  authorized  to  effect  early  discharge  and  reenlist  members  within  3 
months prior to their 6th, 10th, or 14th year active service anniversary dates (not to be confused 
with the normal expiration of enlistment), for the purpose of qualifying for a Zone A, B, or C SRB 
respectively.    In  such  cases,  SRB  payments  will  be  reduced  by  any  portion of unserved service 
obligation.  Commanding officers shall ensure that such personnel are fully qualified to receive an 
SRB and advise them that all periods of unserved obligated service will be deducted from their 
bonus entitlement. Any such discharges shall be under authority of Article 12.B.12., indicating dis-
charge for the purpose of immediate reenlistment at the Convenience of the Government. 
 
Article 3.C.5. states the following: 
 
1. Members with exactly 6 years active duty on the date of reenlistment or operative date of exten-
sion will be entitled to the Zone A multiple in effect for their rating if they are otherwise eligible. If 
they have previously received a Zone A bonus or no Zone A bonus is designated, they are entitled 
to a Zone B bonus if one is in effect.  
2.  Members  with  exactly  10  years  active  duty  on  the  date  of  reenlistment  or  operative  date  of 
extension  will  be  entitled  to  the  Zone  B  multiple  in  effect  for  their  rating  if  they  are  otherwise 
eligible. If they have previously received a Zone B bonus or no Zone B bonus is designated, they 
are entitled to a Zone C bonus if one is in effect. 
 

Article  3.C.11.2.  provides  that  within  the  three  months  preceding  a  member’s  sixth  or 
tenth anniversary, the command must counsel the member about his eligibility to be reenlisted on 
the anniversary to receive a Zone A or Zone B SRB and must document that counseling on a 
Page 7.   
 
ALCOAST 329/02, which was in effect on the applicant’s sixth anniversary, November 

4, 2002, authorized an SRB multiple of 3 for members in the GM2 rating in Zone A or Zone B. 

 
ALCOAST 182/03, which was in effect when the applicant reenlisted on May 26, 2004, 

authorized an SRB multiple of 2.5 for members in the GM1 rating in either Zone A or Zone B. 

 
ALCOAST 283/06, which was in effect on the applicant’s tenth anniversary, November 

4, 2006, authorized an SRB multiple of 2 for members in the GM1 rating in Zone B. 

 
 
Article 3.C.7.1. of the Personnel Manual provides that “[b]onus payments will be com-
puted by taking the authorized SRB multiple, multiplying it by the member's monthly basic pay 
and multiplying the result by the number of months of newly obligated service and dividing this 
figure by 12.  Shown as an equation, this would be: 
 

“SRB multiple x monthly basic pay x months newly obligated service 

12” 

 
Article 3.C.7.2. states that “[w]hen computing the additional obligated service for which 
SRB can be paid, a fraction of a month will be rounded up to the whole month.  …  An exception 
to this rule, however, is members who are discharged no more than 7 days early because their 
period  of  active  obligated  service  expires  on  a  Friday,  Saturday,  Sunday,  or  holiday.    In  such 
cases, members will be considered to have completed the full enlistment for SRB computation.”  
November 4, 2006, was a Saturday. 

 

1. 

 
2. 

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 applicable law: 
 

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

The application was timely.2  

The applicant’s record does not contain a Page 7 documenting SRB counseling on 
his sixth anniversary, as required by Article 3.C.11.2. of the Personnel Manual.  Therefore, the 
applicant has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the Coast Guard erred by failing to 
counsel him about his eligibility for a Zone A SRB on his sixth anniversary, November 4, 2002.  
If the applicant had been timely counseled, he could have reenlisted on his sixth anniversary to 
receive a Zone A SRB calculated with a multiple of 3 under ALCOAST 329/02.  Therefore, the 

                                                 
2 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”). 

Board finds that the applicant’s record should be corrected to show that he reenlisted on his sixth 
anniversary for a Zone A SRB. 

If  the  applicant  had  reenlisted  on  November  4,  2002,  he  would  not  have  been 
authorized to reenlist on May 26, 2004, because members may only reenlist within 90 days of the 
end of their enlistments or of their sixth or tenth anniversaries or when required to obligate suffi-
cient service to accept orders for transfer, training, etc.3  Therefore, his May 26, 2004, reenlist-
ment contract should be removed from his record as null and void. 

If the applicant’s May 26, 2004, reenlistment contract is voided, the Zone B SRB 
he received for that contract will be recouped and under ALCOAST 283/06, the applicant will be 
entitled to a Zone B SRB for the six-year reenlistment contract he signed on November 1, 2006.  
Although  the  SRB  multiple  in  effect  in  May  2004  was  larger  than  the  multiple  in  effect  in 
November  2006,  these  corrections  are  in  the  applicant’s  interest  because  the  applicant  will 
receive both a Zone A and a Zone B SRB.  In addition, the Board notes that although the appli-
cant reenlisted on November 1, 2006, three days prior to his tenth anniversary on November 4, 
2006,  under  Article 3.C.7.2. of the Personnel Manual, those three days should not reduce any 
Zone B SRB he receives for the reenlistment because his anniversary fell on a Saturday. 

 
3. 

 
4. 

 
5. 

 
6. 

 
7. 

The  Coast  Guard recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record to 
show that he reenlisted for four years on his sixth anniversary, but he could have reenlisted for up 
to six years, as he requested.  A four-year contract would give him a smaller Zone A SRB calcu-
lated with a multiple of 3, in accordance with ALCOAST 329/02, and 14 months of newly obli-
gated service, and it would not reduce his Zone B SRB for reenlisting for six years on his tenth 
anniversary because he would have no previously obligated service on that date.  Therefore, his 
Zone B SRB would be calculated with a multiple of 2, in accordance with ALCOAST 283/06, 
and 72 months (six full years) of newly obligated service.  A six-year contract on his sixth anni-
versary would give the applicant a Zone A SRB calculated with a multiple of 3 and 38 months of 
newly obligated service but would mean that he would have two years of previously obligated 
service remaining on his tenth anniversary.  Therefore, his Zone B SRB would be calculated with 
a multiple of 2 and only 48 months of newly obligated service.   

Since on his sixth anniversary, the applicant would have had the option of reen-
listing for four or six years, the Board finds that he should again have the option of reenlisting for 
either four or six years on his sixth anniversary.  In addition, the Coast Guard should counsel him 
about the impact of these options so that he may make an informed decision. 

Accordingly, relief should be granted by correcting the applicant’s record to show 
that  he  reenlisted  for  at  least  four  years,  but  at his discretion, for up to six years on his sixth 
active duty anniversary for a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 329/02.  In addition, his reenlist-
ment contract dated May 26, 2004, should be removed from his record as null and void, and he 
should be entitled to the Zone B SRB authorized under ALCOAST 283/06 when he reenlisted for 
six years on November 1, 2006, instead of the Zone B SRB he received for the May 26, 2004, 
contract. 

                                                 
3 Personnel Manual, Articles 1.G.10.e., 12.B.7.b., 4.B.6.a., and 3.C.5.9. 

The application of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction of his military 

ORDER 

 

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

record is granted as follows: 

 
After the Coast Guard counsels him about his options under this order, his record shall be 
corrected to show that he reenlisted on his sixth active duty anniversary for at least four years, 
but at his discretion for up to six years, to receive a Zone A SRB under ALCOAST 329/02. 

 
His reenlistment contract dated May 26, 2004, shall be removed from his record as null 
and void, so that he is not entitled to a Zone B SRB for that contract.  Instead, his November 1, 
2006, reenlistment contract shall be corrected to show that he is entitled to a Zone B SRB under 
ALCOAST 283/06. 

 
The Coast Guard shall pay him the amount due as a result of these corrections.   
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 Donna M. Bivona 

 

 

 
 Diane L. Donley 

 

 

 
 
 Richard Walter