Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 05104-03
Original file (05104-03.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
                                             DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
 BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                                       2 NAVY ANNEX
                                                       WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

                                                                                          T RG
 Docket No: 5104-03
 28 July 2004
From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj:
Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) Case Summary
 (2) Subject’s naval record
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, the widow of a former enlisted member in the Navy, filed an application with this Board requesting an upgrade of her late husband’ s discharge.
2. The Board, consisting of Mr.  Mr. nd Mr. reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and
 injustice on 20 July 2004 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 ai7l administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations within the Department of the Navy.
b.       Although it appears that Petitioner’s application 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.       Subject enlisted in the Navy on 23 April 1965 at age 21. At that time he had completed eight years of education and attained a GCT score of 35, which placed him in Mental Group IV.
d.       After Subject completed initial training, he then served in a satisfactory manner for about 16 months. On 12 August 1966 he reported to the USS LITTLE ROCK (CLG 4,) his second duty station. On 25 September 1966 he was apprehended by civil authorities in Norfolk, VA. The next day, he was convicted in municipal court of two counts of assault and destruction of private property. He was sentenced to 30 days in jail on each count of assault and a suspended $500 fine if he made restitution for the property damage. The time from the date of his arrest on 25 September 1966 until his discharge was considered lost time. On 17 October 1966 he missed ship’s movement because of his confinement.


e.       On 19 October 1966 Subject was notified of separation processing due to conviction by civil authorities. In connection with this processing, he elected to waive the right to have his case heard by an administrative discharge board. After review, the discharge authority directed an undesirable discharge by reason of misconduct. He was so discharged on 6 December 1966.
f.       Submitted with Petitioner’S application is a partial copy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a newspaper article that discusses the racial problems in Virginia in the 1950’s, which included resistance to the integration of public schools. She contends that her late husband was arrested after a racial incident. In this regard, Subject prepared a statement before his death stating that he was attacked by four white men and was charged with assault and destruction of property after he defended himself. It is also contended that he did not receive adequate help for his problem from the Navy. There are no details in the service record concerning the offenses which resulted in his discharge.
g.       The Board obtained a report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). That report shows that Subject has no record of convictions on file with that agency.
CONCLUSION:

 Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record the Board concludes that Petitioner’s request warrants favorable action. Subject served without incident for about 17 months prior to his arrest by civil authorities. Further, although no details are available, it is certainly possible that racial discrimination was a factor in the incident that resulted in his arrest and conviction. Since the FBI has reported that Petitioner has no convictions, it appears that he was a good citizen for many years. Given the circumstances, the Board concludes that no useful purpose is now served by the undesirable discharge and any doubt as to the nature of his offenses should now be resolved in his favor. Therefore, recharacterization to a general discharge is warranted as a matter of clemency.

 RECOMM ENDAT ION:
a.      That Subject’s naval record be corrected to show that on 6 December 1966 he was issued a general discharge by reason of misconduct vice the undesirable discharge now of record.
b.       That this Report of proceedings be filed in Petitioner’s naval record.
c.       That the Department of Veterans Affairs be informed upon request that Petitioner’s application was received by the Board on 17 June 2003.
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.




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.

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10797-07

    Original file (10797-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, the widow of a former member of the naval service, filed an application with this Board requesting that her late husband's discharge be recharacterized from general to honorable. The Board further concludes that this Report of Proceedings should be filed in Subject's naval record so that all future reviewers will understand the reasons for the change in the characterization of service. That Subject's naval record be corrected to show...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 01450-00

    Original file (01450-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD S a . The court sentenced him to a f. Subsequently Petitioner was processed for an administrative discharge based on his conviction by civil On 25 February 1955 the discharge authority authorities. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's b. naval record.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 05040-02

    Original file (05040-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 19 November 1956 you received NJP for The punishment The punishment imposed was 10 On 13 February 1957 you were convicted by summary court-martial of failure to obey a lawful order and damaging government property. ...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08100-01

    Original file (08100-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board, consisting of Mr. Beckett, Mr. Leeman and Mr. Taylor, reviewed Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice on 16 April 2002 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. In any case, the Board concludes that the bad conduct discharge should now be recharacterized to general as a matter of clemency. That this Report of Proceedings be filed in Petitioner's naval record c. That...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605859C070209

    Original file (9605859C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time the other CID agent drew his service pistol and struck the applicant several times on the back of his head. On 27 March 1979 the Army Discharge Review Board denied a request from the applicant to upgrade his discharge. The applicant received a complete and unconditional separation on 12 February 1966 for his honorable service covering almost 2 years.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01628-09

    Original file (01628-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 November 2009. your application, together with all Material submitted in support thereof, your late husband’s naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your late husband's discharge because of the seriousness of his misconduct and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02771

    Original file (BC-2006-02771.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told by his commanding officer and base commander that he was receiving an AFR 39-16 undesirable discharge due to a civil court action. Additionally, applicant had the following derogatory information on file in the master personnel record: (1) On 28 May 1962, applicant received an Article 15 for being found guilty of hit and run by the Biloxi Police. The discharge authority approved the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01130-03

    Original file (01130-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 11 September 1946, the commanding officer informed the Bureau of Naval Personnel of the civil conviction, but recommended that Petitioner be retained in the Navy. That Petitioner's naval record be corrected to show that on 15 November 1946 he was issued a general discharge by reason of misconduct vice the undesirable discharge now of record. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08858-10

    Original file (08858-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 June 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your late husband's naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Although your husband’s commanding officer recommended that he be retained in the naval service, the Chief of Naval Personnel directed...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001057987C070420

    Original file (2001057987C070420.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The Board considered the following evidence: DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: