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. 2010-059
SUMMARY OF THE RECORD
The applicant asked to be paid a selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) for reenlisting for
4 years on April 15, 2009. He alleged that he was eligible to reenlist for an SRB on that date
because he needed to obligate additional service to accept transfer orders and his rating was
authorized an SRB under ALCOAST 286/08. However, he alleged, someone entered the
contract into the database incorrectly, which cause the contract to be void. Therefore, he did not
receive the SRB. The applicant’s record shows that he originally enlisted for 6 years from July
12, 2005, through July 11, 2011. 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. His record also shows that he transferred to his new unit on June 9, 2009,
and needed at least 4 years of obligated service to execute the transfer orders.
The Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard recommended that the Board
grant relief because the record supports the applicant’s allegations. The JAG stated that whoever
counseled the applicant apparently confused a reenlistment contract, which becomes effective
upon signature, with an extension contract, which becomes operative on the day after the end of
the current enlistment.
In response to the JAG’s recommendation, the applicant asked the Board to correct his
record to show that he extended his enlistment for 6 years on April 15, 2009, instead of signing a
4-year reenlistment. He explained that his unit on South Padre Island, Texas, is three hours away
from the closest Coast Guard administrative office, so all communications were conducted by
email, fax, and telephone. At the time, he was told that he could only get the bonus by reenlist-
ing and that he could only reenlist for 4 years, but he now knows that he was actually eligible to
reenlist or extend for up to 6 years and that a 6-year extension would have maximized his SRB.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
Under Article 3.C.3. of the Personnel Manual, the applicant was entitled to accurate SRB
counseling on April 15, 2009, when he was authorized to reenlist or extend his enlistment to
obligate service for transfer. The dates on his April 15, 2009, contract show that his counselor
did not understand the difference between a reenlistment contract and an extension contract.
Moreover, under Articles 1.G.2.a.1. and 1.G.15.a.2. of the Personnel Manual, the applicant was
eligible to reenlist or extend his prior enlistment for up to 6 years. Yet the Page 7 prepared by
the counselor states that he could only reenlist or extend for up to 4 years. The Board finds that
the preponderance of the evidence clearly shows that the applicant was miscounseled and that, if
he had been properly counseled, he would likely have extended his prior enlistment for 6 years to
receive the maximum SRB for which he was eligible.
ORDER
The military record of MK2 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, USCG, shall be corrected
by removing the 4-year reenlistment contract dated July 12, 2011, but signed on April 15, 2009,
from his record as null and void. Instead, his record shall show that he signed a 6-year extension
contract on April 15, 2009, to obligate service for transfer. The Coast Guard shall pay him the
SRB he is due under ALCOAST 286/08 as a result of this correction.
September 23, 2010
Date
Lillian Cheng
Francis H. Esposito
Randall J. Kaplan
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,...
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...
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.
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...
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...
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...
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...
2009-258 SUMMARY OF THE RECORD The applicant asked the Board to order the Coast Guard to pay him the selective reenlistment bonus (SRB) that is cited on his June 29, 2009, six-year reenlistment contract. of the Personnel Manual, was authorized to reenlist for a longer period to receive an SRB. (2) states that enlisted members receiving tuition assistance “do not incur a service obligation but must complete the course of instruction prior to RELAD, separation or retirement.” Therefore,...
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....