DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 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. He alleged
that on November 1, 2006, based upon erroneous counseling from his unit’s yeoman, he
extended his enlistment for 42 months to accept transfer orders to a new assignment. He further
alleged that he was erroneously counseled that he could cancel the extension upon his arrival at
his new duty station, without any deduction for previously obligated service. In fact, he was only
required to have one year of service remaining to accept orders to a new duty station and he could
not cancel the extension without a penalty, because it was more than 2 years in length. The
applicant submitted a statement from the yeoman admitting that she provided the applicant with
erroneous counseling. The applicant lost over $26,000 of his Zone B SRB as a result of the
deduction for previously obligated service.
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 service required to accept transfer orders and about his SRB entitlement.
The JAG recommended that the November 1, 2006 extension contract be corrected to show that
the applicant extended his enlistment for 4 months and not 42 months, with his then-enlistment
expiring on December 8, 2007. The applicant’s record should be further corrected to show that
on December 7, 2007, he reenlisted for six years and received a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 4
under ALCOAST 304/07.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The JAG admitted, and the Board finds, that the Coast Guard committed an error by
erroneously counseling the applicant that he needed to extend his enlistment for 42 months to
accept transfer orders and that he could cancel the 42-extension at his new duty station without
having previously obligated service deducted from his SRB, which resulted in a monetary loss
for the applicant. See Articles 3.C.3 and 3.C.5. & 6. of the Personnel Manual. Accordingly, the
applicant is entitled to relief.
ORDER
The application of XXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, for correction of his military record is
granted. His November 1, 2006, extension contract shall be corrected to show that he extended
his enlistment for 4 months, instead of 42 months, with an enlistment expiration date of
December 8, 2007. His record shall be further corrected to show that he reenlisted for 6 years on
December 7, 2007, instead of May 15, 2007, for a Zone B SRB with a multiple of 4 under
ALCOAST 304/07, without any deduction for previously obligated service. The Coast Guard
shall pay the applicant the amount due as a result of these corrections.
Jeff M. Neurauter
Lynda K. Pilgrim
Eric J. Young
June 24, 2008
Date
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...
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2009-016
Accordingly, the JAG recommended that the Board correct the applicant’s record by voiding his June 23, 2007, extension contract and his March 9, 2009, reenlistment contract, and entering a six-year extension contract dated July 17, 2007, for a Zone A SRB pursuant to ALCOAST 304/07. The Board finds that when the applicant signed the 30-month extension contract on June 23, 2007, to obligate service for the transfer to Petaluma, he should have received SRB counseling pursuant to Article 3.C.3....
The JAG recommended that the Board authorize payment of the SRB for the extension contract. of the Personnel Manual states that to be eligible for a Zone B SRB, the member must “[h]ave completed at least 6 but not more than 10 years active service on the date of reenlistment or the operative date of the extension.” Article 3.C.2.6. states that the operative date is “[t]he date the extension begins to run.” In addition, Article 1.G.19.
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. His record does not On July 1, 2007, the applicant reported for duty to Station Miami Beach, and on July 7th...
In this regard, the Coast Guard recommended that the extension contract be corrected to show that the applicant agreed to extend his enlistment for a period of 4 years and 6 months (54 months); that the extension was for the purpose of a PCS transfer; and that the applicant was entitled to receive a SRB with a multiple of 0.5. On its face, the extension agreement shows that on April 9, 2007, the applicant and the Coast Guard executed an agreement that required the applicant to extend his...
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,...
This final decision, dated March 31, 2005, is signed by the three duly appointed APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant, an operations specialist second class (OS2), asked the Board to correct his military record to make him entitled to a Zone A selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with a multiple of 2.1 He alleged that, prior to being transferred to his current station on July 7, 2003, he was not properly counseled about his eligibility for an SRB when he signed a...
The Board notes that the JAG alleged that the applicant should also have been advised of his Zone A SRB eligibility on his 6th anniversary, April 28, 2009, pursuant to Article 3.C.9. There is no Page 7 in the applicant’s record documenting SRB counseling on his 6th anniversary, but since he had already extended his enlistment through February 26, 2016, to receive a Zone B SRB and so could not reenlist for just 6 years, through April 27, 2015, to receive a Zone A SRB, he was not actually...
This final decision, dated December 29, 2004, is signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is entitled to a Zone B selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) calculated with seventy-two months of newly obligated service.1 He alleged that he was miscounseled about his eligibility for the SRB and that if he had been properly counseled, he would have reenlisted for six years on May 13, 2003, in lieu of extending, to...