DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2004-015 
 
 
   

 

 
 

FINAL DECISION 

 
ULMER, Chair: 
 
 
This  proceeding  was  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  section  1552  of 
title  10  and  section  425  of  title  14  of  the  United  States  Code.    The  application  was 
docketed on November 3, 2003, upon receipt of the applicant’s completed application 
and military records. 
 
 
members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  June  30,  2004,  is  signed  by  the  three  duly  appointed 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST 

 
 
 The  applicant  asked  that  his  military  record  be  corrected  by  removing 
conscientious  objector  as  the  reason  for  his  discharge.    The  applicant  was  honorably 
discharged  from  the  Coast  Guard  on  August  21,  1981,  for  convenience  of  the 
government under Article 12.B.12 of the Personnel Manual, with a KCM (conscientious 
objector1) separation code and an RE-4 (not eligible for reenlistment) reenlistment code.    
 
 
The applicant stated that he was persuaded to "throw away my military career in 
support  of  [certain]  religious  convictions,  which  views  are  not  biblically  correct."    He 
stated  that  he  was  wrong  in  pursuing  a  conscientious  objector  discharge  and  that  he 
wanted to fulfill his enlistment by serving in the military as a chaplain.  He stated that 
since his discharge he has continued to study the Bible, that his eyes have been opened, 
and that he does not want to leave this earth as a conscientious objector.   
                                                 
1      Article  4.a.(1)  of  Commandant  Instruction  1900.8,  dated  November  30,  1990  and  currently  in  effect, 
defines  conscientious  objection  as  "[a]  firm,  fixed  and  sincere  objection,  by  reason  of  religious  training 
and belief, to participation in war in any form or the bearing of arms." 

 
 
The applicant stated on his application that the statute of limitations should be 
waived  in  his  case  because  he  wants  to  finish  his  enlistment  and  because  he  loves 
America and the United States military. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD AND SUBMISSIONS 

 
 
The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on August 23, 1971, and was released 
into the Reserve on August 22, 1975.  He reenlisted in the regular Coast Guard for four 
years on October 10, 1979.   
 
 
On March 16, 1981, the applicant submitted a letter to his officer-in-charge (OIC) 
requesting to be discharged as a conscientious objector to military service.2   He stated 
that  he  was  conscientiously  opposed  to  participation  in  combatant  or  noncombatant 
military  service.    The  applicant's  church  acknowledged  that  he  was  an  active 
participating member of their denomination.   
 
 
On  March  19,  1981,  an  Air  Force  psychiatrist  evaluated  the  applicant.    The 
psychiatrist found that the applicant suffered from "no significant psychiatric disorder."  
 
 
On  March  23,  1981,  a  chaplain  interviewed  the  applicant.    The  chaplain  stated 
that the applicant's beliefs were clearly, firmly, and sincerely held, which qualified the 
applicant as a conscientious objector. 
 
 
On April 9, 1981, the applicant submitted another request to his OIC requesting 
to be discharged and stating that he "refused to mix military  . . . and religion to follow 
the example of Jesus Christ.  By doing this I demonstrate my faith in God's Kingdom, 
the only solution to all the problems the politicians cannot solve."    He also stated that 
he could no longer serve in the Coast Guard or any other branch of the military service.    
 
 

 

On April 13, 1981, the applicant's OIC forwarded the applicant's request to the 
OIC's supervisor stating that a discharge may be in the greater interest of the service.  
The OIC's supervisor forwarded the applicant's request to the next officer in the chain 
of  command,  who  requested  that  a  hearing  officer  be  appointed  to  review  the 
applicant's conscientious objector request.   
 

                                                 
2   Commandant Instruction 1900.2B (Conscientious Objectors and the Requirement to Bear Arms), dated 
July 14, 1976, was in effect when  the applicant was discharged in 1981.  It contained the procedure for 
evaluating  and  processing  a  member  who  claimed  to  be  a  conscientious  objector.    The  Board  has  been 
unable to locate this earlier instruction.  However, the applicant has not alleged that any violations of that 
instruction occurred in the processing of his conscientious objector request.      

 
On  June  3,  1981,  a  hearing  officer  recommended  that  the  applicant's 
conscientious objector application be approved.   He concluded that the applicant was 
conscientiously  opposed  to  participation  in  any  war,  in  any  form;  that  his  opposition 
was  founded  on  religious  training  and  belief;  and  that  his  beliefs  were  sincere  and 
became  crystallized  following  his  enlistment  in  the  Coast  Guard.    The  hearing  officer 
further reported: 
 

[The applicant's] sincerity is best evidenced by his willingness to endure 
the  sneers  and  disrespect  of  his  shipmates  because  of  his  beliefs.    The 
applicant's  testimony,  his  performance  of  duty,  and  his  peers'  reactions 
attest to the fact that his beliefs are strongly and sincerely held.  There is 
literally no evidence to the contrary. 
 
On  June  19,  1981,  the  district  legal  officer  favorably  endorsed  the  applicant's 
 
request for a conscientious objector discharge, finding the record to be legally sufficient 
and complete.  He further stated that the applicant's beliefs were formed subsequent to 
his enlistment in the Coast Guard.   
 
 
On July 13, 1981, the Chief of the General Law Division of the Chief Counsel's 
Office  of  the  Coast  Guard  determined  that  the  evidence  of  record  supported  the 
findings and recommendation made by the hearing officer and the district commander.  
 
 
On August 13, 1981, the Commandant directed that the applicant be discharged.  
On August 21, 1981, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Coast Guard for 
the  convenience  of  the  government,  with  a  KCM  (conscientious  objector)  separation 
code and an RE-4 reenlistment code. 
 
 
The applicant's military record contains only one captain's mast, under Article 15 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), for disobeying an order directing him 
to read an operations order and pass it to the next watch.  He was punished by being 
restricted to the base for 7 days and by forfeiting $50 of his pay for one month. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  March  22,  2004,  the  Judge  Advocate  General  (TJAG)  of  the  Coast  Guard 
submitted  an  advisory  opinion  adopting  the  facts  and  analysis  provided  by  the 
Commander,  Coast  Guard  Personnel  Command  (CGPC),  which  was  attached  to  the 
advisory  opinion  as  Enclosure  (1).    TJAG  noted  that  the  applicant's  application  was 
untimely, but he stated that granting partial relief as recommended below will allow the 
applicant the opportunity to once again offer his services to the nation's armed forces. 
 
 
CGPC  recommended  that  the  Board  grant  partial  relief  by  upgrading  the 
applicant's  reenlistment  code  from  RE-4  to RE-3C  (eligible  for  reenlistment  except  for 

disqualifying factor: conscientious objector).  In recommending that no other relief be 
granted, CGPC stated the following:  
 

that 

the  painstaking  process 

The DD-214 instruction states that the information contained thereon is a 
concise record of a period of service in the Armed Forces  . . . The record 
clearly  demonstrates 
the  Applicant 
underwent  and  the  Coast  Guard  followed  to  confirm  his  deeply  held 
religious  beliefs  at  that  time  against  military  service  .  .  .  [D]espite  the 
Applicant's current feeling about his discharge, the words "conscientious 
objector" do not appear on his DD-214 . . .   The Coast Guard and the other 
armed  services  invest  a  great  deal  of  time  and  effort  to  ensure  that 
discharges  for  religious  reasons  are  based  on  sincerely  held  beliefs,  and 
not motivated by other reasons to leave the service.  It would be strongly 
against the Services' interest to change the records of any other member in 
these  circumstances,  as  it  could  possibly  encourage  insincere  efforts  to 
obtain a discharge for this reason.  
 
CONDTINST  1900.2B  (Conscientious  Objector  and  the  Requirement  to 
Bear  Arms)  dated  July  1976  was  not  available  for  our  review,  but  after 
examining the current policy for processing conscientious objectors  . . . it 
appears  from  the  Applicant's  record  that  a  careful,  deliberative  process 
very  similar  to  the  current  process  was  in  place  at  the  time  of  his 
separation.  I am satisfied that all the proper steps were taken to ensure 
the applicant received full due process.   
 
Current  policy  only  authorizes  reenlistment  code  RE-3C  (ineligible  to 
reenlist, except with a waiver) for SPD code KCM.3  Based on the Equity 
Standard of Review . . . the Applicant's reenlistment code may be changed 
from RE-4 to RE-3C.  

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On  April  27,  2004,  the  Board  received  the  applicant's  reply  to  the  views  of  the 
Coast Guard and stated that he was "in full accord with the recommendation granting 
partial  relief  to  change  my  reenlistment  code,  thusly  allowing  me  to  approach  the 
United States Armed Forces."  He stated that his approach in 1980 to the discharge was 

                                                 
3   Commandant Instruction M1900.4B (Instruction for the Preparation and Distribution of the DD Form 
214), dated September 25, 1979, was in effect at the time of the applicant's discharge.  Chapter 2 of this 
instruction  contained  the  Separation  Program  Designators  for  enlisted  personnel.    For  the  KCM 
separation code, either an RE-3C or an RE-4 reenlistment code was authorized.   
 

very improper and "seemed to bring all sort of reproach upon God, my Country and my 
family."   
 
In  a  later  submission,  the  applicant  questioned  why  he  was  not  referred  to  a 
 
chaplain  in  the  Coast  Guard  and  he  wondered  whether  the  Coast  Guard  had  any 
officers or Bible knowledgeable personnel within their ranks.  He stated that he wished 
that he had not been given such an easy or early discharge from the Coast Guard.   
 

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 section 1552 

of title 10 of the United States Code.   
 

2. 

The applicant requested an oral hearing before the Board.  The Chairman, 
acting pursuant to 33 C.F.R. § 52.31, denied the request and recommended disposition 
of the case without a hearing.  The Board concurs in that recommendation. 

 
 
3.  The application was not timely.   To be timely, an application for correction of 
a military record must be submitted within three years after the applicant discovered or 
should  have  discovered  the  alleged  error  or  injustice.    See  33  CFR  52.22.      This 
application was submitted approximately 19 years beyond the statute of limitations.   
 
 
4.  The Board may still consider the application on the merits, however, if it finds 
it is in the interest of justice to do so.  The interest of justice is determined by taking into 
consideration the reasons for and the length of the delay and the likelihood of success 
on the merits of the claim. See, Dickson v.  Secretary of Defense, 68 F.3d 1396 (D.D.C. 
1995); Allen v. Card, 799 F. Supp. 158, 164 (D.D.C. 1992).   While the applicant's reasons 
for not filing his case sooner are not persuasive, the fact that TJAG has recommended 
limited  relief  indicates  to  the  Board  that  the  applicant's  claim  may  have  some  merit.  
Therefore, the Board will waive the statute of limitations and review the merits in this 
case. 
 
 
5.  The applicant has not presented any evidence showing that his discharge by 
reason  of  conscientious  objection  in  1981  was  either  in  error  or  unjust.    In  fact,  the 
applicant originated the 1981 request and the Coast Guard spent a considerable amount 
of time ensuring that the applicant's religious beliefs  were genuine.  The fact that the 
applicant  now  believes  that  his  current  religious  beliefs  are  compatible  with  military 
service  does  not  establish  an  error  with  respect  to  his  1981  conscientious  objector 
discharge.  The record accurately reflects the reason for the applicant's 1981 discharge.   

 
 
6.  However, the Board agrees with TJAG that the applicant's RE-4 reenlistment 
code should be upgraded. Although COMDTINST M1900.4B authorized either an RE-
3C  or  an  RE-4  reenlistment  code  for  a  conscientious  objector  discharge  in  1981,  the 
Board  finds  that  the  assignment  of  the  RE-4  was  inconsistent  with  the  applicant's 
favorable performance record and with the lack of any disciplinary problems, except for 
one  minor  infraction.    Moreover,  the  Board  notes  that  today  only  an  RE-3C  is 
authorized for a discharge by reason of conscientious objection.  Therefore, under the 
circumstances  of  this  case,  RE-3C  is  the  more  appropriate  reenlistment  code  and  the 
Board will direct this correction. The RE-3C will allow the applicant to reenlist should 
any branch of the armed forces choose to grant him a waiver.   
 

5. 

Accordingly, the applicant should be granted limited relief.  

 
 
 

 
 
 
 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 

ORDER 

 

The  application  of  former  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,  USCG,  for  correction  of  his 
military  record  is  granted  in  part.    His  record,  including  his  DD  Form  214,  shall  be 
corrected to show that he received an RE-3C reenlistment code upon his discharge in 
1981.   

 
No other relief is granted. 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 Philip B. Busch 

 

 

 
 Richard Walter 

 

 

 
 Suzanne L. Wilson