DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

  

_____________________________________________________________________________                                                               
 
Application for Correction           
of the Coast Guard Record of:                     
                                         
                                                                                       BCMR Docket No. 2008-116 
                                                                               
XXXXXXXXXXX 
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  
 
______________________________________________________________________________ 
 

  

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 May 2, 
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  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.   His record shows that he enlisted on July 8, 1942, 
and  was  discharged  on  April  30,  1945.    The  applicant  stated  that  he  was  approximately  two 
months short of the three years required to be entitled to the Medal when he was discharged due 
to a physical disability.  The applicant did not list the date on which he discovered the alleged 
error.  He stated that it is in the interest of justice to consider his application 60 years after his 
discharge because of his recent receipt of the Jubilee Liberty Medal.    
 

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 (CGPC) 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 July 8, 1942 and was discharged on April 3, 1945  . . .  The 
net  continuous  active  service  during  this  period  was  2  years,  9  months  and  13 
days.   As specified in the Coast Guard Medals and Awards Manual, the required 
period of continuous active service is 3 years to be eligible for the award of the 
Coast Guard Good Conduct Medal.  The applicant’s record does not support that 
he completed 3 years of continuous active service.  The applicant has not provided 
any  information  to  support  his  claim  that  he  is  entitled  to  the  Good  Conduct 
Medal.  Additionally he acknowledges that he was 2 months short of completing 3 
years.  The applicant contends that he is entitled to the Good Conduct Award as 
his enlistment was cut short due to medical conditions.  [However this fact] does 
not overcome the requirement to complete 3 years of continuous active service.  
Policy does not provide any exception to the required service for medical or other 
types of discharges.  

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.  On September 25, 2008, the Board received a letter from the applicant along with 
copies  of  pages  from  his  service  record  that  indicated  to  the  Board  that  the  applicant  was 
amending his application to add additional requests for other medals.  After an inquiry by the 
Board, the applicant telephoned the Board on October 20, 2008, stating that he was only seeking 
the Good Conduct Medal.   
 

 

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

1.  The  BCMR  has  jurisdiction  of the case pursuant to section 1552 of title 10, United 

The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the submissions 

 
 
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 when he discovered the alleged error or injustice.  
However,  the  applicant  should  have  been  aware  at  the  time  of  his  discharge  from  the  Coast 
Guard  that  he  had  not  received  the  Good  Conduct  Medal.    Therefore,  his  application  was 
submitted approximately 60 years past the statute of limitations.   
 

3.    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 did not provide a persuasive reason why it is the interest of justice to 

 
 
waive the statute of limitation in his case.  
 
  
5.  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 Medal at the time of 
his discharge.  In this regard, the applicant had served on active duty only for 2 years, 9 months, 
and  13  days  when  a  period  of  3  years  of  continuous  service  was  required  to  earn  the  Good 
Conduct Medal.  
 
 
6.  The applicant has not submitted any regulation or policy that the Coast Guard makes 
an  exception  to  the  Good  Conduct  Medal  eligibility  criteria  for  those  members  who  failed  to 
satisfy the 3 years of continuous service due to discharge by reason of physical disability.  The 
Board has reviewed the regulation pertaining to the Good Conduct Medal and finds no provision 
for exception to the eligibility criteria.    
  
 
and because it is untimely. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

7.  Accordingly, the applicant's request should be denied because it lacks potential merit 

[ORDER AND SIGNATURES APPEAR ON NEXT PAGE] 

 
 
military record is denied. 

 

  

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

The  application  of  former  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX,  USCGR,  for  correction  of  his 

ORDER 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

        

 
 Bruce D. Burkley 

 

 

 
 Patrick B. Kernan 

 

 

 
 David A. Trissell