RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-00982

XXXXXXXXXX		COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXX

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Bad Conduct discharge be upgraded to Honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The applicant suffered unjust and extreme discrimination in regards to a haircut and for being from a northern state.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force airman basic.

On 09 May 58, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-18, for Sentence of Special Court Martial.  The reasons for the action were as follows:

	On 08 Mar 55, a Summary Court Martial for violation of Article 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty);

	On 23 Mar 55, a Summary Court Martial for violation of Article 86 (Failure to go to appointed place of duty);

	On 21 Jun 55, a Summary Court Martial for violation of Article 86 (Failure to repair) and 134 (Driving on Walker Air Force Base while on suspension from the Base);

	On 31 Mar 56, a Special Court Martial for violation of Article 90 (Willfully disobeying an officer).

On 05 May 58, the discharge action was found legally sufficient, and the discharge authority approved the recommendation for a Bad Conduct discharge on 09 May 58.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denying the application.  The applicant asserts that the basis for his court-martial and Bad Conduct discharge revolved around the failure to get a haircut.  While this is true, the applicant had also, at the time of his court-martial, been convicted at three previous courts-martial for misconduct.  There is no basis in law to suggest that the applicant’s court-martial sentences are injustices warranting correction by the Board.  While clemency may be granted, the applicant’s counsel offers no new evidence to support why relief should be warranted.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 10 May 17 for comment (Exhibit D), and the applicant replied on 19 Jul 17.  In the response, the applicant’s counsel contended that the service member is now deceased; however, the Veteran Legal Institute is requesting an Honorable discharge in order for the member to be buried at Riverside National Veteran Cemetery.  Counsel makes a reference to the service member being unwilling to participate in hazing of his fellow service members that were of African American decent.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force clemency bulletin to the applicant’s counsel on 17 Apr 18 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an injustice.  It appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and was within the commander’s discretion.  The discharge was not unduly harsh or disproportionate to the offenses committed.  In the interest of justice, the Board considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency; however, given the evidence presented, the Board finds no basis to do so.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-00982 in Executive Session on 15 Aug 18:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 04 Mar 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 16 Feb 17.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 10 May 17.
Exhibit E:	Counsel’s response, dated 19 Jul 17.
Exhibit F:	Clemency Letter, SAF/MRBC, sent 17 Apr 18
	
Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.