DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00
TJR
Docket No: 1842-06
29 November 2006

From:	Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:	Secretary of the Navy

Subj:	REVIEW NAVAL RECORD OF 

Ref:	(a) 10 U.S.C. 1552

End:	(1) Case summary
(2)	Subject’s naval record

1.	Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a former enlisted member of the Navy, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that the characterization of his discharge be changed.

2.	The Board, consisting of Mr. Ms. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 28 November 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.

3.	The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice finds as follows:

a.	Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.

b.	Although it appears that enclosure (1) was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the interest of justice to waive the statue of limitation and review the application on its merits.

c.	Petitioner enlisted in the Navy on 4 February 1948 at the age of 17. At the time of Petitioner’s enlistment he had completed 10 years of formal education and attained test scores which placed him in Mental Group IV.

	d.	Petitioner served for ten months without disciplinary incident, but on 10 and 15 December 1948 he was convicted by deck court (DC) of a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA) and absence from his appointed place of duty for seven hours and 30 minutes.

	e.	On 16 February 1949 Petitioner was convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of an 11 day period of UA. Approximately six -months later, on 3 August 1949, he was again convicted by SCM of failure to stand watch in a military manner and sleeping on watch, and sentenced to a $240 forfeiture of pay and a bad conduct discharge (BCD), which was suspended for six months.

	f.	As a result of a four day period of UA, on 19 May 1950, Petitioner was convicted by SCM and sentenced to extra duty for 30 days, a $120 forfeiture, and a BCD. Subsequently, the suspended BCD was vacated and on 12 July 1950, Petitioner was so discharged.

g.	Petitioner submitted supporting documentation with his application which reflects that on 30 June 1973 he was honorably retired from the Army and transferred to the Army Reserve after serving for slightly more than 20 years. During this period he advanced to the rank of staff sergeant (E-6), served in Vietnam, and received the Bronze Star and Army Commendation Medal.

CONCLUSION:

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action.

The Board’s finding is based on Petitioner’s youth and limited education, the severity of the punishment awarded for the nature of his misconduct, and his good post service conduct. The Board does not condone Petitioner’s misconduct, but notes that his infractions consisted of four very short periods of UA and two instances of improper watch standing. As such, the Board feels that under current standards he would not receive a BCD.

Further, the Board believes that Petitioner, after honorably serving in the Army for more than 20 years, should no longer suffer the stigma of a BCD. Based on the foregoing, and considering the fact Petitioner has suffered the consequences of a punitive discharge for more than 55 years, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is served by continuing to characterize

Petitioner’s service as having been under other than honorable conditions, and recharacterization to a general discharge is appropriate.

In view of the foregoing, the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting the following corrective action.

RECOMMENDATION:

a.	That Petitioner’s naval record be corrected to show that he was issued a general discharge on 12 July 1950 vice the BCD actually issued on that same day.

b.	That a copy of this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.

c.	That, upon request, the Veterans Administration be informed that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 12 May 2006.

4. It is certified that a quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.	

ROBERT D. ZSALMAN	ALAN E. GOLDSMITH
Recorder	Acting Recorder

5. Pursuant to the delegation of authority set out in Section 6(e) of the revised Procedures of the Board for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulation, Section 723.6(e)) and having assured compliance with its provisions, it is hereby announced that the foregoing corrective action, taken under the authority of reference (a), has been approved by the Bo~2rd on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy.

							W. DEAN PFEIFFER 
       Executive Director