DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
_____________________________________________________________________________
Application for Correction
of the Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket No. 2008-104
XXXXXXXXXXXXX
xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
______________________________________________________________________________
FINAL DECISION
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 Chair docketed the application on April
18, 2008, upon receipt of the applicant’s completed application, and subsequently prepared the
final decision as required by 33 CFR § 52.61(c).
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
This final decision, dated December 17, 2008, is approved and signed by the three duly
RELIEF REQUESTED AND ALLEGATIONS
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he earned the Good
Conduct Medal during his period of service from August 27, 1943 to February 12, 1946. The
applicant believes that he was not awarded the Good Conduct Medal because of a captain’s mast
he received during “A” school. The applicant’s military record shows that he was punished at
captain’s mast on June 30, 1945 and that he received 3.5 in conduct as a result of the captain’s
mast.
The applicant stated that he is 82 years old and regrets not receiving this award. He
asserted that he has led an exemplary life since his discharge and that he had spent 41 years in
banking and retired in that field as a regional vice president.
his delay in bringing this application be excused for the reasons stated above.
The applicant did not list the date on which he discovered the alleged error but asked that
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On September 9, 2008, the Board received an advisory opinion from the Judge Advocate
General (JAG) of the Coast Guard. The JAG requested that the Board accept the memorandum
from Commander, Coast Guard Personnel Command as the advisory opinion.
CGPC recommended that the Board deny relief. In recommending denial of relief, CGPC
noted that the application was untimely and that the applicant had failed to provide any
justification for delay in bringing his claim. CGPC stated that if the Board decides to waive the
three-year statute of limitations and consider the application on the merits, it should still be
denied for the following reasons:
A complete review of the applicant’s record confirms that the applicant enlisted in
the Coast Guard on August 27, 1943 . . . and was discharged 2 years, 5 month and
16 days later on February 12, 1946 . . . Regardless of the applicant’s conduct or
non-judicial punishment he does not meet the minimum 3 year continuous active
duty requirements specified in the Medal and Awards Manual1 . . . for the award
of the Good Conduct Medal.
APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On September 12, 2008, the Board sent a copy of the Coast Guard views to the applicant
for a response. The Board did not receive a response from the applicant.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the submissions
1. The BCMR has jurisdiction of the case pursuant to section 1552 of title 10, United
of the applicant and the Coast Guard, the military record of the applicant, and applicable law.
States Code. The application was not timely.
2. To be timely, an application for correction must be filed within three years of the date
the alleged error or injustice was, or should have been, discovered. See 10 U.S.C. § 1552,
33 CFR § 52.22. The applicant did not state the date on which he discovered the alleged error or
injustice. Therefore, his application is untimely by approximately 59 years past the statute of
limitations.
3. However, the Board may still consider the application on the merits, if it finds 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 ahs
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).
4. The applicant stated that it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitation
in his case due to his age, the fact that he has been an upstanding citizen for more than 41 years,
1 Enclosure (11) to Article 5.A.1. of the Medal and Awards Manual states that during the period from July 1, 1934
through and including June 30, 1947, three years of continuous active duty is required to be entitled to the award of
the Coast Guard Good Conduct Medal, as well as a 4.0 in conduct.
and his regret for committing the misconduct that he believes led to his not receiving the award.
However, none of the reasons given by the applicant explains why he could not have acted
sooner. The applicant has not provided the Board with a persuasive reason to excuse his
untimeliness.
5. However, the Board must still perform a cursory review of the merits in deciding
whether it is in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations. With respect to the
merits, the Board finds that the applicant is not likely to prevail. The applicant did not meet the
eligibility requirements for a good conduct award at the time of his discharge. In this regard, at
the time of his discharge, the applicant had served on active duty only for 2 years, 5 months, and
16 days when 3 years of continuous service was required to earn the Good Conduct. In addition,
he did not have the required 4.0 average in conduct due to the 3.5 mark he received after being
punished at captain’s mast. See Enclosure (11) to Article 5.A.1. of the Medals and Awards
Manual. Accordingly, the applicant has put forth no evidence that the Coast Guard committed an
error and/or injustice by not awarding the Good Conduct Medal to him.
and because it is untimely.
6. Accordingly, the applicant's request should be denied because it lacks potential merit
[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE]
The application of former RM3c xxxxxxxxxxx, xxxxxxxxxx, USCGR, for correction of
ORDER
his military record is denied.
Vicki J. Ray
George A. Weller
Janice Williams-Jones
CG | BCMR | Medals and Awards | 2008-116
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS _____________________________________________________________________________ Application for Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. This final decision, dated January 22, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly RELIEF REQUESTED AND ALLEGATIONS The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he earned the Good Conduct Medal for his service in the 1940s. CGPC stated that if the...
CG | BCMR | Medals and Awards | 2008-133
This final decision, dated February 12, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he earned the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) for his participation as a member of the Boarding team aboard USCGC Rush that interdicted and seized 15 tons of cocaine in March/April 2001. However, the applicant should have been aware at the time of his discharge from the Coast Guard, on April 12, 2001, that he had...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2008-087
The Commandant denied the applicant’s appeal of the CO’s determination that he was not recommended for reenlistment. The JAG further stated the following: [Commander, Coast Guard Personnel Command’s (CGPC)] thorough review of the applicant’s service record did not reveal any evidence to support Applicant’s claim. of the Personnel Manual stated that the appeal of an RE-4 reenlistment code delayed the discharge of a member with less than 8 years of service.
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2008-131
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. This final decision, dated February 12, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by directing the Coast Guard to pay him severance pay due to his separation by reason of physical disability due to schizophrenia on November 26, 1980. The BCMR has jurisdiction of the...
CG | BCMR | Enlisted Performance | 2008-131
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS Application for the Correction of the Coast Guard Record of: BCMR Docket No. This final decision, dated February 12, 2009, is approved and signed by the three duly APPLICANT’S REQUEST The applicant asked the Board to correct his record by directing the Coast Guard to pay him severance pay due to his separation by reason of physical disability due to schizophrenia on November 26, 1980. The BCMR has jurisdiction of the...
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2005-094
The applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard with a general discharge under honorable conditions (known as a general discharge) by reason of misconduct (drug abuse). To be timely, an application for correction of a military record must be submitted within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered or should have been discovered. The applicant did not allege any specific error or injustice on the part of the Coast Guard, nor did he present any proof that the Coast...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2007-202
On July 10, 1984, the CO informed the applicant that the CO intended to recommend that the applicant be honorably discharged from the Coast Guard by reason of unsuitability due to personality disorder. On July 28, 1984, the Commandant directed that the applicant be discharged from the Coast Guard by reason of unsuitability. The Board notes that the applicant’s request is for a correction to his record to show that he served on active duty for 24 months so that he is eligible for DVA benefits.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2007-032
The BCMR has jurisdiction of the case pursuant to section 1552 of title 10 of the of the applicant and the Coast Guard, the military record of the applicant, and applicable law. In this regard, the applicant’s military record shows the following meritorious service, conduct, and accomplishments: • On June 5, 1944, the applicant was authorized to wear the Asiatic-Pacific Area Ribbon. The Coast Guard shall correct his record to show that he received an honorable discharge.
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2005-026
With respect to untimeliness, the JAG stated that an application for correction of a military record must be filed within three years after the alleged error or injustice was or should have been discovered, unless the delay is excused in the interest of justice. However, in light of the fact that the general discharge was listed on her DD Form 214, which she signed at the time of her discharge, and her acknowledgement that her CO had recommended that she receive a general discharge prior to...
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2008-117
APPLICABLE REGULATIONS Under Chapter 12-B-4 of the Coast Guard Personnel Manual in effect in 1953, members could receive an Honorable discharge if (a) they were never convicted by a general court-martial and were convicted not more than once by a special court-martial and (b) their final average marks were at least 2.75 for proficiency in rating and 3.25 for conduct. Members could receive a General discharge if they had been convicted only once by a general court-martial or more than once...