DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for the Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
FINAL DECISION
BCMR Docket No. 2009-239
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked the Board to correct the signature dates on his March 14, 2009, 6-
year reenlistment contract and to pay him the selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) cited on the
contract. He alleged that a yeoman told him to sign the contract on January 15, 2009, because he
often deployed as part of a TACLET team and might be out of touch with the administrative
office when his enlistment ended on March 13, 2009. However, the Coast Guard refused to pay
him the SRB because the signature and effective dates do not match. The contract, which was
entered in the applicant’s record, reenlists him for 6 years as of March 14, 2009, but the
signatures are dated January 15, 2009. Both the contract and a Page 7 in his record show that he
was promised an SRB under ALCOAST 286/08 for the reenlistment.
The Judge Advocate General of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board grant the
applicant’s request because the record supports his allegations.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under Article 3.C.3. of the Personnel Manual, members are entitled to accurate SRB
counseling whenever they reenlist or extend their enlistments. Because reenlistment contracts go
into effect on the day of signature, the applicant’s yeoman should not have had him sign the
contract in advance of the effective date. The Board is persuaded that had he known that signing
a March 14, 2009, contract on January 15, 2009, would prevent him from receiving the SRB, the
applicant would have waited to sign the contract. Accordingly, relief should be granted.
[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]
ORDER
Julia Andrews
Dorothy J. Ulmer
The military record of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, USCG, shall be corrected by changing
the signature dates on his March 14, 2009, reenlistment contract to show that it was signed on
March 14, 2009, rather than January 15, 2009. The Coast Guard shall pay him any amount due
under ALCOAST 286/08 as a result of this correction.
June 8, 2010
Date
*The third member of the Board was unavailable. However, pursuant to 33 C.F.R. § 52.11(b),
two designated members constitute a quorum of the Board.
*
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...
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. The JAG argued that the applicant was eligible only for a Zone B SRB because he had completed more than seven years of active duty when he reenlisted, and pursuant to Article 3.C.4.b.3. The Board will exercise its authority and grant...
His record also contains a Page 7 documenting SRB counseling on April 15, 2009, and stating that he would receive an SRB based on 22 months of newly obligated service as a result of reenlisting for 4 years. The Page 7 also states that he was eligible to reenlist or extend his enlistment “for a maximum of 4 years.” The signatures on the reenlistment contract are dated April 15, 2009, but the typed date of reenlistment on the front page is July 12, 2011. In response to the JAG’s...
There is no evidence of the July 28, 2009, extension contract in the record submitted to the Board by the Coast Guard, which contains only his original 6-year enlistment dated October 29, 2003, and the 4- year reenlistment dated October 14, 2009, and contains no Page 7s documenting SRB counseling. The JAG alleged that the applicant could have reenlisted for an SRB on July 28, 2009, and recommended that the Board reenlist the applicant for 4 years on that date for an SRB calculated with...
UNITED STATES COAST GUARD, COMDT- INST M1000.6A, PERSONNEL MANUAL, Art. Therefore, the preponderance of the 5 UNITED STATES COAST GUARD, COMDTINST M1000.6A, PERSONNEL MANUAL, Art. The Coast Guard shall correct her record to show that she canceled her four-month extension contract dated November 21, 2006, by reenlisting for a Zone A SRB on July 15, 2009, for a term of 4, 5, or 6 years, at her discretion.
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,...
The JAG stated that although the applicant’s September 30, 2008, enlistment/reenlistment contract states that he was entitled to receive an SRB, he was not eligible for an SRB because he served only 11 months on active duty when he integrated into the regular Coast Guard, and a reservist must have served at least 12 months continuous active duty for an enlistment in the regular Coast Guard to be considered a reenlistment. The enlistment of Coast Guard Reserve personnel who are serving on...
The JAG recommended that the Board deny relief, arguing that the applicant was not eligible for an SRB because he did not complete 17 months of continuous active duty prior to signing the contract, and because his June 28, 2009, contract was an enlistment, rather than a reenlistment since he had not served more than 12 months on extended active duty. However, the applicant was not eligible for an SRB for integrating into the regular Coast Guard on June 28, 2009, for two reasons: First, he...
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...