DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 
Application for the Correction of 
the Coast Guard Record of: 
 
                                                                                BCMR Docket No. 2007-162 
 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx   

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 July 27, 2007, upon receipt of 
the applicant’s completed application, and assigned it to staff member 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  April  10,  2008,  is  approved  and  signed  by  the  three  duly 

APPLICANT’S REQUEST AND ALLEGATIONS 

 
 
The applicant is a former radioman second class who enlisted in the Coast Guard Reserve 
on July 31, 1943; served on active duty during World War II; and was honorably discharged on 
May 10, 1946.  He asked the Board to correct his record to show that he is eligible to a Good 
Conduct  Medal,  a  Combat Action  Ribbon,  and  any  others  to  which  he  may  be  entitled.    He 
alleged  that  he  should  be  entitled  to  wear  the  Combat Action  Ribbon  because  of  his  service 
aboard the USS Savage when it was attacked during a convoy, which “earned [him] one battle 
star.”    The  applicant  made  no  allegations  with  respect  to  his  entitlement  to  a  Good  Conduct 
Medal.  He alleged that he discovered these errors on June 18, 2007. 
 

SUMMARY OF THE RECORD 

 
 
On July 31, 1943, the applicant enlisted in the Reserve.  He was assigned to various shore 
units until September 7, 1944, when he was transferred to the USS Savage, where he served until 
May 2, 1946.   The  applicant was honorably discharged on May 10, 1946, upon completing 2 
years, 9 months, and 10 days of service.  His DD 214 shows that he is entitled to wear the Ameri-
can Theater of Operations Ribbon, the Asiatic Pacific Theater of Operations Ribbon, the Euro-
pean African Middle Eastern Campaign Ribbon, and the World War II Victory Ribbon. 
 
 
The applicant’s service record indicates that all but one of his conduct marks were 4.0.  
The only conduct mark lower than 4.0 was a mark of 3.9 he earned at mast for “sleeping in after 

reveille” on February 6, 1946.  The Coast Guard calculated his final average conduct mark as 3.9 
and his final average proficiency mark as 3.3.  There is no indication that either the applicant or 
the crew of the USS Savage was ever awarded a Combat Action Ribbon. 
 

VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
On December 13, 2007, the Judge Advocate General submitted an advisory opinion in 
which he adopted the findings and analysis provided in a memorandum on the case prepared by 
the Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC).  CGPC recommended that the Board deny the 
applicant’s request.  CGPC noted that the application is not timely and argued that it should be 
denied because the applicant “has failed to substantiate any justification for the delay in present-
ing this case. 
 

Regarding the applicant’s request for a Good Conduct Medal, CGPC stated that Chapter 
5.A.1.  of  the  Medals  and Awards  Manual  specifically  requires  a  member  to  complete  at  least 
three years of active service to earn this medal.  Since the applicant did not complete three years 
of  active  service,  CGPC  argued,  he  is  not  entitled  to  a  Good  Conduct  Medal.    Regarding  the 
Combat Action Ribbon, CGPC noted that under Chapter 2.B.7. of the Medals and Awards Man-
ual, the “principal eligibility criterion is that the individual must have participated in a ground or 
surface  combat  firefight  or  action  during  which  the  individual  was  under  enemy  fire,  and 
performance  while  under  fire  must  have  been  satisfactory.    The  Combat  Action  Ribbon  is 
intended to be restrictive and awarded only in bona fide cases of combat and not as a campaign 
ribbon.”  CGPC stated that, although the applicant served aboard the USS Savage from Septem-
ber 7, 1944, until shortly before his discharge, there is no record of the Combat Action Ribbon 
having been awarded to the applicant or to the crew of the USS Savage as a whole.  CGPC fur-
ther stated that a review of the applicant’s records indicates that his DD 214 duly notes all of the 
ribbons to which he is entitled.  Therefore, his request should be denied. 
 

APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD 

 
 
Guard and invited him to submit a response within thirty days.  No response was received. 

On December 18, 2007, the Chair sent the applicant a  copy of the views of the Coast 

APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 

 

 
 
Enclosure (11) to the Medal and Awards Manual (COMDTINST M1650.25C), states that 
during World War II, receipt of a Good Conduct Award required at least three years of continu-
ous active service with no single conduct mark less than 4.0 (out of 4.0).  Enclosure (11) also 
shows that the current criteria for a Good Conduct Medal for active duty members are that they 
must serve three continuous years on active duty with no conviction at mast (NJP), court-martial, 
or equivalent civil court.  In addition, during the three years, the member must not receive an 
average mark lower than a 3 (out of 7) in any performance factor and must not receive a conduct 
characteristic mark lower than a 4 (out of 7). 
 
 
Enclosure  (1)  of  the  Medal  and Awards  Manual  states  that  the  Combat Action  Ribbon 
was first authorized on February 17, 1969.  Chapter 2.B.7. states that the “principal eligibility 

criterion is that the individual must have participated in a ground or surface combat firefight or 
action during which the individual was under enemy fire, and performance while under fire must 
have  been  satisfactory.   The  Combat Action  Ribbon  is  intended  to  be  restrictive  and  awarded 
only in bona fide cases of combat and not as a campaign ribbon.”  Enclosure (2) of the Medal 
and Awards Manual lists all of the units (primarily ships) that have been authorized the Combat 
Action Ribbon and the dates of service/combat for which the ribbon was awarded.  The earliest 
date  indicated  in  Enclosure  (2)  is  1961.    Chapter  2.B.17.f.  of  the  Medal  and Awards  Manual 
issued  in  1982  (COMDTINST  M1650.25)  states  that  “[e]ffective  17  November  1976,  the 
retroactive  provisions  of  the  Combat Action  Ribbon  were  eliminated  and  the  time  limitations 
imposed  by  Chapter  1.A.6.c.  are  applicable.”    Chapter  1.A.6.c.  states  that  an  award  must  be 
recommended within three years of the date of the service. 
 

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 10 U.S.C. § 1552.   

1. 

 

2. 

An application to the Board should be filed within three years of when the appli-
cant discovers the alleged error in his record. 10 U.S.C. § 1552(b).  The record indicates that the 
applicant  knew  or  should  have  known  whether  or  not  he  had  been  awarded  a  Good  Conduct 
Medal or a Combat Action Ribbon upon his discharge in 1946.  Therefore, the Board finds that 
his application was untimely. 

Pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1552(b), the  Board may  excuse the untimeliness of an 
application 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 to determine 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 provided no justification for his lengthy delay in applying to this 
Board.  Moreover, the Board’s review of his record indicates that his DD 214 already shows all 
of the medals and ribbons to which he is entitled.  With less than three full years of continuous 
active service, his record does not meet the criteria for a Good Conduct Medal under either 1946 
or current standards.  In addition, the Combat Action Ribbon was not authorized until 1969, and 
there is no evidence in the record that it was ever awarded retroactively to the crew of the USS 
Savage in World War II.   

Accordingly, the Board will not waive the statute of limitations, and the applica-

   
3. 

 
4. 

 
5. 

tion should be denied for untimeliness and lack of merit. 
 
 

The  application  of  former  RM2c  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,  USCGR,  for 

ORDER 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 

 
 Dorothy J. Ulmer 

 

 

 

 
 
 Thomas H. Van Horn 

 

 

 
 
 Darren S. Wall 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

correction of his military record is denied.