DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2003-004 
 
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  
  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ANDREWS, Deputy Chair: 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  under  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title 10 and section 425 of title 14 of the United States Code.  It was docketed on 
October  28,  2002,  upon  receipt  of  the  applicant’s  completed  application  and 
military records. 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  May  29,  2003,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 

The  applicant  asked  the  Board  to  correct  his  discharge  form  DD  214  to 
show that he served in Greenland during World War II and was treated for frost-
bite.  He alleged that after his tour in Greenland, when he was being processed 
for  discharge,  he  was  also  treated  for the  “lingering  aftereffects”  of  frostbite  in 
the sick bay of the separation station in Boston.  He alleged that a doctor told him 
that  if  he  was  willing  to  stay  in  the  service  for  several  weeks  for  testing  in 
evaluation, he might receive disability benefits.  However, he alleged, because of 
his  “immaturity,  lack  of  information  as  to  the  possible  long-term  effects  from 
frostbite, and [his] eagerness to return to [his] family,” he chose to be discharged 
as soon as possible.  Now, however, the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (DVA) 
has denied his claim because, he alleged, his medical records have been lost. 

 
The  applicant  alleged  that  he  discovered  the  errors  in  his  record  on 

August 28, 2001. 

  

SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S MILITARY RECORDS 

 
On  July  14,  1943,  the  applicant  enlisted  in  the  Coast  Guard  Reserve  for 
 
three years.  Upon completing training at Manhattan Beach, he was first assigned 
to  Station  Biddeford  Pool  in  Maine,  where  he  advanced  to  seaman  first  class.  
The applicant’s Health Record shows that he  was treated for reflex otalgia and 
tinea cruris in December 1943, while he was serving at Station Biddeford Pool. 
 

On February 9, 1944, the applicant was transferred to the U.S.S. Northland, 
which carried supplies across the Atlantic Ocean.  In July 1944, upon the appli-
cant’s request, he was sent to attend Radio School in Atlantic City for 24 weeks.  
In August 1944, his Health Record shows, he was hospitalized with complaints 
of  pain  of  unknown  etiology.    He  was  discharged  with  a  diagnosis  of  anxiety 
hysteria.  Upon graduation from Radio School on December 30, 1944, the appli-
cant became a radioman third class. 

 
On January 20, 1945, the applicant was transferred to an airplane refueling 
base  in  Narsarssuaq,  Greenland,  which  for  security  purposes  was  denoted  on 
personnel documents as “Navy-1503.”  On February 14, 1945, he left Navy-1503 
preparatory to being discharged.  On the same day, the base surgeon at Navy-
1503 signed a Medical Certificate Prior to Departure from Overseas Station.  The 
certificate states that the applicant “has been found free from any communicable 
disease,  free  from  vermin,  and  has  been  properly  examined.”    The  applicant’s 
Health  Record  notes  his  assignment  to  Navy-1503,  but  there  is  no  evidence  of 
any medical treatment for frostbite. 

 
On April 5, 1946, the applicant was examined and found to be medically 
fit for discharge by a surgeon in the U.S. Public Health Service in Boston.  On a 
Termination of Health Record, the doctor noted that he had no diseases or phy-
sical conditions likely to result in disability or death and no other “defects.”  The 
applicant  signed  this  report,  agreeing  with  the  doctor  that  he  had  no  physical 
defects.  On April 6, 1946, the applicant was honorably discharged.  His  Notice 
of Separation sites his service at all of his duty stations, including Navy-1503. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On February 24, 2003, the Chief Counsel of the Coast Guard submitted an 
advisory opinion in which he recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s 
request for untimeliness or, in the alternative, failure of proof. 
 
 
The Chief Counsel stated that the applicant “was aware, or should have 
been aware, of these alleged errors well before 2001.”  He argued that because 

the applicant was discharged in 1946, his application is clearly untimely by more 
than fifty years. 
 
Furthermore, the Chief Counsel stated, “[n]otwithstanding the substantial 
 
delay  in  submitting  his  petition  for  correction,  the  Coast  Guard  has  carefully 
reviewed the Applicant’s record and cannot find any evidence that supports the 
corrections he seeks.”  He pointed out that there are no entries in the applicant’s 
record indicating that he was ever treated for frostbite.  He also stated that the 
applicant’s  Notice  of  Separation  clearly  shows  his  assignment  to  Navy-1503, 
which for security reasons was the proper denotation of the base in Narsarssauq, 
Greenland. 
 
 
the Coast Guard and invited him to respond.  No response was received. 
 

On February 28, 2003, the BCMR sent the applicant a copy of the views of 

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: 
 

1. 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to sec-

tion 1552 of title 10 of the United States Code.   
 

2. 

An application to the Board must be filed within three years of the 
day the applicant discovers the alleged error in his record.  10 U.S.C. § 1552(b). 
The applicant alleged  that he discovered the errors on August 28,  2001.  How-
ever, he knew or should have known that his Notice of Separation did not men-
tion Greenland on the date of his discharge in 1946, when he received the notice.  
Therefore, his request with respect to his Notice of Separation is untimely.   

 
3. 

 
The Board may waive the three-year statute of limitations if it is in 
the interest of justice to do so.  10 U.S.C. § 1552(b).  To determine whether it is in 
the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations, the Board should con-
sider the reasons for the delay and conduct a cursory review of the merits of the 
case.  Dickson v. Secretary of Defense, 68 F.3d 1396, 1405 (D.C. Cir. 1995); Allen v. 
Card, 799 F. Supp. 158, 164 (D.D.C. 1992).  The applicant provided no explanation 
for  his  delay  in  requesting  the  correction  of  the  alleged  error  on  his  Notice  of 
Separation.  Moreover, a cursory review of the record indicates that his Notice of 
Separation  is  accurate  in  that  it  properly  documents  his  service  on  Greenland 
with the denotation Navy-1503.  Therefore, the Board finds no reason to waive 
the  statute  of  limitations  with  respect  to  the  applicant’s  request  that  the  Board 
correct his Notice of Separation to show that he served on Greenland. 

 
4. 

It  is  possible,  however,  that  the  applicant  did  not  discover  that 
records of his alleged treatment for frostbite were missing from his record until 
2001.    Nevertheless,  the  Board  finds  that  this  claim  must  be  barred  under  the 
doctrine  of  laches  because,  more  than  fifty  years  after  the  alleged  treatment, 
whatever evidence or testimony there might have been to support or refute the 
applicant’s allegation is not available.   

 
5. 

The Board notes that both upon leaving Navy-1503 on February 14, 
1946,  and  on  the  day  prior  to  his  discharge,  April  5,  1946,  the  applicant  was 
examined by doctors who did not report any disability or defect in the record.  
On April 5, 1946, the applicant concurred with the doctor’s finding that he was 
free  of  defect.    Moreover,  he  has  not  submitted  any  evidence  to  rebut  the  pre-
sumption of regularity accorded Coast Guard records under the Board’s rules at 
33 C.F.R. § 52.24(b).   

 
6. 

Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be denied. 

 

ORDER 

 

The application of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, 

USCGR, for correction of his military record is denied. 
 
 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 

 
 

 

 

 

 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 
 Julia Andrews 

 

 

 

 
 
 Christopher A. Cook 

 

 

 
 
 Patrick Judd Murray