DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 
701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD. SUITE 1001 
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 

Docket No: 5539-16 
DEC 12 2016 

Dear : 

Thank you for your correspondence to the Secretary ofthe Navy regarding your request for 
correction of your father, the late naval record. I am responding on 
behalf ofthe Honorable Mr. Mabus, to your application pursuant to the provisions oftitle 10 of 
the United States Code, section 1552. 

Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of 
justice to waive the statute oflimitations and consider your application on its merits. A threemember 
panel of the Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, 
considered your application on 9 November 2016. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe 
panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in 
accordance with admfoistrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis 
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour application, together 
wnh all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, 
regulations, and policies. 

After careful and conscientious consideration ofthe entire record, the Board found the evidence 
submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Your father enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty on 17 March 1942. During 
August 1945, your father was the subject ofan investigation for scandalous conduct. On 
3 August 1945, he made a voluntary statement admitting to misconduct and agreed to accept an 
undesirable discharge for the good ofthe service and to avoid trail by court-martial. Although 
the complete separation documentation is not in his record, on 7 August 1945, his commanding 
officer recommended an undesirable discharge by reason of unfitness. As a result ofthis action, 
he was spared the stigma ofa court-martial conviction and the potential penalties ofa punitive 
discharge and confinement at hard labor. On 18 October 1945, he was so discharged with an 
undesirable discharge. 

The Board, in its review ofyour father's record and your application, carefully weighed all 
potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that your father had exemplary military 
service during World War IL Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not 
sufficient to warrant recharacterization ofhis discharge given his misconduct. In this regard, the 
Board believed that considerable clemency was extended to him when his request for discharge 
to avoid trial by court-martial was approved. The Board concluded that he received the benefit 
of his bargain with the Navy when his request was granted and should not be permitted to change 
now. The Board concluded that his discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted. 
Accordingly, your application has been denied. 

It is regretted thatthe circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. 
You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material 
evidence within one year from the date ofthe Board's decision. New evidence is evidence not 
previously considered by the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this regard, it is 
important to keep in mind that a presumption ofregularity attaches to all official records. 
Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the 
applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. 

Sincerely, 


Executive Director