DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2007-095 
 
XXXXXXXXXXXXX 
xxxxxxxxxx,  DC3/E-4 (former) 
   

FINAL DECISION 

 

 

  

 
 
This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section 425 of 
title 14 of the  United States Code.  The Chair docketed the case on  February 16, 2007, upon 
receipt of the applicant’s completed application, and assigned it to staff members D. Hale and  
J. Andrews to prepare the decision for the Board as required by 33 C.F.R. § 52.61(c). 
 
 
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case. 
 

This  final  decision,  dated  October  25,  2007,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant, a former damage controlman third class (DC3; pay grade E-4) who served 
nearly three years in the Coast Guard before being discharged in 1983 for misconduct (marijuana 
use), asked the Board to correct his record by upgrading his “general” discharge to “honorable.”  
He stated that “[t]he record is not in error nor is it unjust.  What I am seeking is clemency.  I am 
a recovering alcoholic and part of my program is making amends.  I deeply regret my behavior 
and if there were any way to make it up to the Guard, I would.”  He added that in his career as a 
teacher he has “pointed a number of well qualified individuals to the Coast Guard’s direction,” 
and  frequently  shares  with  his  students  the  “positive  parts”  of  his  Coast  Guard  service.    The 
applicant did not explain his long delay in seeking the requested correction.  
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on October 27, 1980, after serving in the Air 
Force for six  years.  On November 14, 1980, he completed prior service indoctrination and a 
Page 71 was placed in his record documenting that he had “been informed of the Coast Guard 
exemption program for disclosure of drug use and possession incident to such use and was given 
a full explanation of the program.”   

                                                 
1 A Page 7 entry documents any counseling that is provided to a service member as well as any other noteworthy 
events that occur during that member’s military career. 
 

 
On  March  20,  1981,  the  applicant  was  awarded  non-judicial  punishment  (NJP)2  for 
“being in possession of marijuana,” a violation of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military 
Justice (UCMJ). 

 
On May 5, 1983, the applicant was awarded NJP for “knowingly and willfully us[ing] an 
illegal substance, to wit - Marijuana.”  This was his second violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. 

 
On June 2, 1983, the applicant’s commanding officer (CO) notified him by memorandum 
that he had initiated action to discharge the applicant from the Coast Guard.  The CO cited the 
applicant’s two NJPs for marijuana possession and use as the reasons for discharge. 

 
On  June  21,  1983,  the  applicant  responded  to  his  CO’s  letter  of  June  2,  1983.  
Acknowledging his marijuana use, he stated that he had been counseled on his legal rights and 
“accept[s]  the  decision  to  be  discharged  from  the  Coast  Guard,”  and  “understand[s]  the 
implications of a general discharge.”  In his letter, he also requested “serious consideration for an 
honorable discharge” because he successfully performed his Coast Guard duties and the Coast 
Guard benefited from his “professionalism as an instructor and as a DC aboard ship.” 

 
On  June  23,  1983,  the  applicant  sent  a  letter  to  the  Commandant  indicating  that  he 
waived his right to a hearing before an administrative discharge board, and acknowledged that he 
understood that a discharge under other than honorable conditions could deprive him of many or 
all of his rights as a veteran.  

 
On July 1, 1983, the CO of the applicant’s unit sent a memorandum to the Commandant 
wherein he recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Coast Guard by reason of 
misconduct.  The commander cited the applicant’s two NJPs as the reasons for the recommended 
discharge,  and  noted  that  “although  [the  applicant]  has  performed  very  well  in  the  past,  …  a 
General Discharge is recommended due to the gravity of the marijuana related offenses.”  The 
District Commander endorsed this recommendation. 
 

On  August  19,  1983,  the  applicant  was  discharged  from  the  Coast  Guard  pursuant  to 
Article  12.B.18.  of  the  Coast  Guard  Personnel  Manual.    He  received  a  general  discharge 
characterized as “under honorable conditions,” a separation code of HKK,3 and “misconduct” as 
the  narrative  reason  for  separation.    The  record  indicates  that  the  applicant  received  an  RE-4 
reenlistment code (ineligible for reenlistment).   

                                                 
2 Article 15 of the UCMJ provides NJP as a disciplinary measure that is more serious than administrative corrective 
measures but less serious than trial by court martial. 
3  HKK  denotes  an  involuntary  discharge  directed  in  lieu  of  further  processing  or  convening  of  a  board  (board 
waiver) when a member who commits drug abuse, which is the illegal wrongful or improper use, possession, sale, 
transfer  or  introduction  on  a  military  installation  of  any  narcotic  substance,  intoxicating  inhaled  substance, 
marijuana,  or  controlled  substance,  as  established  by  21  USC  812…  The  Separation  Program  Designator  (SPD) 
Handbook also requires that an RE-4 reenlistment code and a narrative reason for separation of “Misconduct” be 
assigned to members being discharged with the HKK separation code.   (SPD) Handbook, 2-56.  

 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On June 5, 2007, the Judge Advocate General (JAG) of the Coast Guard submitted an 
advisory opinion in which he adopted the findings provided in a memorandum on the case by 
Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) and recommended that the Board deny the applicant’s 
request.  CGPC argued that the applicant was involved in two drug incidents, and awarded NJP 
for  each  of  those  instances,  and  that  his  subsequent  discharge  was  in  accordance  with  Coast 
Guard policy for processing members for misconduct.  CGPC further noted that at the time of the 
applicant’s discharge, Coast Guard policy required that enlisted members in the paygrades E-6 
and below involved in a second drug related offense be processed for separation. 
 

 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

On June 11, 2007, the BCMR sent the applicant a copy of the views of the Coast Guard 

 
 
and invited him to respond within 30 days.  The BCMR did not receive a response. 
 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

Article  12.B.18.a.  of  the  Personnel  Manual  in  effect  at  the  time  of  the  applicant’s 
discharge, provides that an enlisted member may be separated by reason of misconduct with a 
discharge  characterized  as  other  than  honorable  conditions,  general  discharge,  or  honorable 
discharge as warranted by the particular circumstances of the given case. 
 

Article 12.B.18.b.4. provides that the Commandant may direct the discharge of a member 
for the illegal, wrongful, or improper use, possession, sale, transfer, or introduction on a military 
installation of any narcotic substance, marijuana, or controlled substance.   
 

Article  12.B.32.  provides  that  a  member  being  discharged  under  other  than  honorable 
conditions is entitled to legal counsel and must be afforded the right to present his case to an 
administrative discharge board.   
 

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: 
 

The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to section 1552 of title 

10 of the United States Code. 

1. 

 
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  was 
issued a DD Form 214 on August 19, 1983, with a discharge characterized as “under honorable 
conditions.”  This information is clearly marked on the DD 214 and thus he knew or should have 
known that he had received a discharge characterized as under honorable conditions.  Therefore, 

the Board finds that the application was filed more than 21 years after the statute of limitations 
expired and is untimely. 

Under  10  U.S.C.  §  1552(b),  the  Board  may  waive  the  three-year  statute  of 
limitations if it is in the interest of justice to do so.  In Allen v. Card, 799 F. Supp. 158, 164 
(D.D.C. 1992), the court stated that in assessing whether the interest of justice supports a waiver 
of the statute of limitations, the Board “should analyze both the reasons for the delay and the 
potential merits of the claim based on a cursory review.”  The court further instructed that “the 
longer the delay has been and the weaker the reasons are for the delay, the more compelling the 
merits would need to be to justify a full review.”  Id. at 164, 165.  See also Dickson v. Secretary 
of Defense, 68 F.3d 1396 (D.C. Cir. 1995).  
 

The applicant did not allege that his discharge from the Coast Guard was in error 
or unjust.  In his application for correction, he merely stated that he wants his discharge upgraded 
because he is making amends as a recovering alcoholic.  He failed to explain his delay in seeking 
the  requested  correction  or  to  provide  a  compelling  reason  why  the  Board  should  waive  the 
statute of limitations.   
 

A cursory review of the record indicates the Coast Guard committed no error or 
injustice in awarding the applicant a discharge characterized as under honorable conditions.  The 
records  show  that  he  was  advised  of  the  Coast  Guard’s  drug  policies  during  his  prior  service 
indoctrination  in  November  1980.    The  records  also  show  that  he  received  two  NJPs  for 
marijuana possession and use during his three years in the Coast Guard, and Article 12.B.18.a. 
provides that a member may be separated with a discharge characterized as other than honorable 
or general if the member illegally possesses or uses marijuana.  The record further indicates that 
before the applicant was discharged, he unconditionally waived his right to a hearing before an 
administrative discharge board, was informed of and afforded his due process rights under Arti-
cle 12.B.32., and that he understood and accepted the Coast Guard’s decision to discharge him.   

4. 

5. 

 
3. 

 
6. 

 

The  delegate  of  the  Secretary  has  held  that,  in  considering  the  character  of  a 
discharge, the Board should not upgrade a discharge based on post-discharge conduct alone, but 
may “take into account changes in community mores, civilians as well as military, since the time 
the discharge was rendered, and upgrade a discharge if it is judged to be unduly severe in light of 
contemporary  standards.”4    Article  12.B.18.b.4.  of  the  current  Personnel  Manual  mandates  a 
general discharge for members who possess or use marijuana.  Therefore, the Board finds that 
the applicant’s discharge in 1983 “under honorable conditions” was not unduly severe by today’s 
standards. 
 

Accordingly,  due  to  the  lengthy  delay  and  the  probable  lack  of  success  on  the 
merits of his claim, the Board finds that it is not in the interest of justice to waive the statute of 
limitations in this case.  Although the Board notes that the applicant is regretful about his past 
behavior, the case should be denied because it is untimely and lacks apparent merit.  

7. 

 
                                                 
4 Memorandum of the General Counsel, U.S. Department of Transportation, to J. Warner Mills, et al., Board for 
Correction of Military Records (July 8, 1976).  

The application of former DC3 XXXXXXXXXXX, xxxxxxxxxx, USCG, for correction 

ORDER 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

of his military record is denied. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

        

 
 
 Philip B. Busch 

 

 
 
 Jordan S. Fried 

 

 
 
 Eric J. Young