RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03333 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to General (Under Honorable Conditions). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His BCD was the result of racial discrimination. None of the allegations pertaining to his court martial are true—it was more like a kangaroo court. Britain was in on it, not wanting Black Airmen on their soil. His unit was filled with Klansman out to do Negros harm and see to it that they received dishonorable discharges. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: After receiving an honorable discharge from the U.S. Army on 17 Feb 47, the applicant entered the Air Force on 7 Sep 51. Prior to 14 Nov 52, the applicant’s records reflect the following four Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) violations on unspecified dates: 1. Summary Court-Martial Conviction for violation of Article 134, breaking restriction, for which he was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 7-days and fined $10.00. 2. Special Court-Martial Conviction for violation of Article 86, going from appointed place of duty, for which he was reduced to Airman Basic, reprimanded, and fined $10.00. 3. Summary Court-Martial Conviction for violation of Article 134, wrongful defecation and urination on the tent floor, for which he was sentenced to hard labor without confinement for 45 days and fined $35.00. 4. Receipt of an Article 15 for being absent from duty, for which he was restricted to the squadron area for 14 days. On 14 Nov 52, the applicant was convicted a by Special Court- Martial of violating UCMJ Articles 86 and 92. Specifically, on or about 26 Oct 52, and again on 31 Oct 52, the applicant “failed to go at the time prescribed to his appointed place of duty;” and, on or about 29 Oct 52, and again on 30 Oct 52, having knowledge of a lawful order issued by his commander to be in bed by 2200, he failed to obey the order. He was sentenced to a BCD, confinement at hard labor for three months, and forfeiture of $25 month for three months. On 11 Mar 53, an Air Force Board of Review found an error in the sufficiency of the two “failure to go” charges from his 14 Nov 52 Court-Martial conviction, and set aside the guilty findings associated with those two specifications. However, citing the applicant’s multiple prior convictions, they found the sentence appropriate. On 12 May 53, the Judge Advocate prepared a Petition for Grant of Review asking for a review of the conviction; however, at the time the applicant absented himself without authority. Ultimately, the U.S. Court of Military Appeals considered the petition on 14 Aug 53, and denied the grant of review. On 30 Apr 54, the applicant was furnished a BCD with the Reason for Separation of “Sentence of Court Martial.” On 19 Feb 13, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. In response, the applicant describes some of his activities since leaving the service and provides a copy of a supporting statement (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include the evidence the applicant submitted in rebuttal to the Air Force advisory, in judging the merits of the case. We note that this Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial conviction. Rather, in accordance with Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552(f), actions by this Board are limited to corrections to the record to reflect actions taken by the reviewing officials and action on the sentence of the court-martial for the purpose of clemency. We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s service characterization, which had its basis in his court-martial conviction and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted. In addition, we considered upgrading his discharge on the basis of clemency; however, we do not find sufficient evidence concerning his post-service activities to warrant relief on this basis. Therefore, we conclude that no basis exists for us to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03333 in Executive Session on 21 Mar 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jul 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Feb 13. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Mar 13, w/atch. Panel Chair