RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-03745

 	COUNSEL:  NONE

 	HEARING:  NOT INDICATED

APPLICANT’S REQUEST.   His injury on 23 Dec 60 be found in the line of duty (LOD), instead of due to willful misconduct.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTION.    He was an innocent victim.  He was beaten by three attackers who broke his jaw and nose and knocked out his teeth.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS.    The applicant retired 31 Jan 66 in the grade of airman first class.

AF Form 348, Line of Duty, dated 29 Dec 60, recommended the applicant’s injury on 23 Dec 60 be found in the LOD, not due to misconduct.  On 16 Mar 61, the in the LOD decision was reversed and his injury was determined not in the LOD-due to misconduct (NILOD-Misconduct).  The reason for the NILOD-Misconduct determination was that the participants voluntarily participated in the affray which resulted in the injury.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:   AFPC/JA recommends denial.  The applicant has not shown by a preponderance of evidence his NILOD-Misconduct determination was the result of an error or injustice.  The reviewing authority had the power to disagree with the appointing authority’s conclusion and substitute his own finding.    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 23 Aug 17 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES:

1.  The application was not timely filed.  However, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  

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 error or injustice.    The Board concurs with AFPC/JA and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s record.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.  

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:  The APPLICANT be informed that the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-03745 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 18:

 , Panel Chair
 , Panel Member
 , Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A: Applicant’s application, DD Form 149, dated 12 Sep 16, w/atchs.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C: Advisory, AFPC/JA, dated 4 Jan 17.  
Exhibit D: Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC, dated 23 Aug 17.  

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.