DEPARTMENT  OF THE  N A V Y  

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y   A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

ELP 
Docket No. 552-02 
10 May 2002 

From:  Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records 
To : 

Secretary of the Navy 

Ref: 

(a) 10 U.S.C.1552 

Encl:  (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments 

(2) Case Summary 
(3) Subject's Naval Record 

1.  Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 
former enlisted member of the Marine Corps applied to this Board 
requesting, in effect, that his naval record be corrected to 
show a more favorable type of discharge than the bad conduct 
discharge issued on 11 April 1946. 

2.  The Board, consisting of Ms. Humberd, Mr. Rothlein and Mr. 
Dunne, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice 
on 8 May 2002 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 Petitioner's application to 

the Board was not filed in a timely manner, it is in the 
interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and 
review the application on its merits. 

c.  Petitioner enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 17 on 
22 February 1943 for the duration of the war.  At the time of 
his enlistment, Petitioner had completed nine years of formal 
education and attained test scores which placed him in Mental 
Group IV.  The record reflects that he was advanced to PFC (E-2) 
and served for seven months without incident.  However, during 
the five-month period from September 1943 to March 1944, he 
received three nonjudicial punishments  (NJP) for absence from 
reveille call, a one day period of unauthorized absence (UA), 
and failure to obey a general order while on post as a sentry. 

d.  Thereafter, Petitioner served without further 

incident for more than a year and saw extensive combat action 
against enemy forces on Guam from 19 August to 3 November 1944, 
and on Iwo Jima from 21 February to 26 March 1945. 

e.  On 17 April 1945 Petitioner was convicted by a deck 

court of failure to obey a general regulation.  On 14 June 1945, 
he was convicted by general court-martial of failure to obey an 
officer's order to leave the nurse's compound and two 
specifications of conduct to the prejudice of good order and 
discipline, by using obscene and profane language in the 
presence of an Army nurse and another superior officer.  He was 
sentenced to confinement at hard labor for five years, reduction 
in rank to PVT (E-1) , total forfeitures, and a dishonorable 
discharge. 

f.  On 25 July 1945 the convening authority approved only 
so much of the sentence that call for a bad conduct discharge 
(BCD), confinement for five months and forfeitures of $20 for 
six months.  Additionally, the BCD was suspended for six months. 
In taking this action, the convening authority cited 
Petitioner's extreme youth, previous good record, his courageous 
service to his country on the field of battle, the extenuating 
circumstances of the case, the time he had been confined 
awaiting trial, and exigencies of the service.  Petitioner was 
released from confinement and restored to duty on 25 November 
1945. 

g.  On 27 February 1946 Petitioner was convicted by civil 

authorities of petty theft and sentenced to 30 days confinement 
in the county jail.  He was released from jail on 29 March 1946 
and reported to military authorities on 31 March 1946.  The 
suspended bad conduct discharge was vacated and ordered 
executed.  He was so discharged on 11 April 1946. 

h.  Petitioner's wife submits a statement that her husband 

was on Iwo Jima and witnessed the raising of the flag.  She 
states that when he was home on leave, he was at a bar and, as a 
prank, took another Sailor's jacket and was arrested.  He and 
his father had expected a fine, but ended up serving 30 days in 
jail.  Petitioner's wife states her husband is so ashamed of the 
actions during his youth and is currently being treated for 
cancer. 

i.  The Federal Bureau of Investigation reported that 

Petitioner has no record of convictions. 

CONCLUSION: 

Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, the 
Board concludes that Petitioner's request warrants favorable 
action.  In this regard, the Board notes Petitioner's youth and 
immaturity, limited formal education, low test scores, and his 
combat service during World War 11.  The Board is also aware of 
his disciplinary record, the general court-martial conviction 
and the aggravating factor that his probation was violated by a 
civilian conviction for petty theft.  However, the Board 
believes that the military and civilian offenses were all 
relatively minor and do not warrant the life-long stigma of a 
bad conduct discharge.  Furthermore, Petitioner put his life on 
the line for his country during some of the most intense 
fighting during World War 11.  It also appears from the FBI 
report that he has had good post-service conduct since his 
discharge.  Based on all of the foregoing, the Board concludes 
that it would be appropriate and just to recharacterize the bad 
conduct discharge to a general discharge under honorable 
conditions . 

RECOMMENDATION : 

a.  That Petitioner's naval record be corrected by showing 

that he was issued a general discharge by reason of misconduct 
on 11 April 1946 vice the bad conduct discharge actually issued 
on that date. 

b.  That this Report of Proceedings be filed in 

Petitioner ' s naval record. 

c.  That, upon request, the Department of Veterans Affairs 

be informed that Petitioner's application was received by the 
Board on 22 January 2002. 

4.  It is certif.ied 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 
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 Regulations, 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 
Board on behalf of the Secretary of the Navy. 

W.  DEAN SEIFFER 
Executive Director