RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01968 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The Board reverses the following convictions from his 4 Dec 10, Special Court-Martial: Charge I, for wrongfully developing a sexual relationship with a student and one specification, for entering Airman B----‘s room without an escort; another specification for entering Airman C---‘s room without an escort, both in violation of Article 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). Charge II, for adultery with a student, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. 2. His demotion to the rank of senior airman (E-4) be rescinded. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was selected for promotion to the rank of technical sergeant (E-6); however, due to the accusation that he committed adultery, he was never allowed to pin-on his rank. There was no evidence that he ever called, sent text messages, or had an inappropriate relationship with his accuser. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, extracts from the Record of Trial and cell phone records. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 31 Jul 96, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force. On 4 Dec 10, the applicant was tried at a Special Court-Martial. He was charged with violating a lawful general regulation for wrongfully developing a sexual relationship with a student, Airman B-----, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; one charge for adultery with a student, Airman B-----, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ; an additional charge for entering Airman B-----‘s room without an escort and for entering Airman C---‘s room without an escort, in violation of Article 92, UCMJ; and an additional charge for making a false official statement to an investigator, in violation of Article 107, UCMJ. He pled not guilty but was found guilty of all charges. He was sentenced to reduction in grade to senior airman and to perform hard labor without confinement for two months. On 19 Dec 10, the convening authority approved the finding and sentence. On 5 Jan 11, The Judge Advocate General (TJAG) reviewed the case under Article 69, UCMJ and affirmed the findings and sentence. On 31 Dec 11, the applicant was discharged for Reduction In Force (RIF) with service characterized as honorable in the grade of senior airman. He served 15 years, 5 months and 1 day of total active service. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The applicant alleged his conviction for the offenses with Airman B------ were not supported by the facts. Specifically, the phone records did not show a record of any phone calls or text messages between him and his accuser. JAJAM states they were unable to review an examination of the applicant’s record of trial because it cannot be located; however, they were able to review the documents provided by him and the limited information in the Air Force Automated Military Justice Analysis and Management System (AMJAMS). Based on the documents provided by the applicant and the information included in AMJAMS, there is no apparent error or injustice in how the court-martial was conducted. The applicant’s sentence to a reduction in grade to airman basic {sic} and hard labor without confinement for two months was well within legal limits. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jun 13, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant reversing the applicant’s court-martial conviction. 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), our actions 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 and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the UCMJ. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Regarding the applicant’s request to rescind his demotion to the grade of SrA, the applicant has not provided any evidence to warrant approving his request. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 Docket Number BC- 2013-01968 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01968 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Apr 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, Letter, dated 14 Jun 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jun 13.