RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04408 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The sentence he received was disproportionate to the offenses he was convicted of. In the civilian court system, his offenses would have resulted in a simple misdemeanor and eventually expunged from his record. He is currently studying law and his BCD could prevent his ability to sit for the Bar exam. He hopes the mistake he made as an immature airman will not affect him for the rest of his life. The applicant believes the Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because his BCD was extremely inappropriate. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of memorandums, and USAF Court of Military Review Summary of Proceedings. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served in the Air Force from 9 Nov 1978 through 2 December 1982. His service was terminated by a BCD. He served a total of 3 years, 9 months and 8 days of active service. Pursuant to the Board's request, the Air Force Office of Special Investigation determined a criminal record does exist. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. Based on the military justice records in this case and consistent with the decision of the Air Force Court of Military Review, JAJM recommends the Board not grant relief based on any error or injustice with the court- martial process. The applicant was tried by special on 15- 16 October 1981. A military judge found the applicant guilty of stealing a wallet, a ring worth less than $50.00, $40.00 in cash on one occasion, $20.00 in cash on another occasion, and $30.00 in cash on another occasion, in violation of Article 121, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He was found to have stolen all of this property from fellow service members. The military judge sentenced the applicant to be discharged with a BCD, to be confined at hard labor for five months, to forfeit $300.00 pay per month for five months, and to be reduced from the grade of senior airman (E-4) to the grade of airman basic (E-1). Due to insufficient evidence, on 10 Feb 1982, the convening authority disapproved the court’s findings with respect to the wallet specification and two cash specifications, leaving the court’s guilty findings with respect to the ring and $30.00 in cash. Despite the changed findings, he approved the sentence as adjudged. On appeal, the applicant argued that the sentence was no longer appropriate because his original sentence was disproportionate for the two offenses of which he was convicted. However, on 16 June 1982, the Air Force Court of Military Review rejected the applicant’s argument and determined that the findings and sentence were correct in law and fact and found that there was no error materially prejudicial to the applicant’s substantial rights. On 27 September 1982, the Court of Military Appeals denied the applicant’s petition for grant of review. On 18 October 1982, the convening authority ordered the applicant’s BCD to be executed. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 13 December 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 error or injustice. We note 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, § 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 conviction and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the UCMJ. We considered upgrading the discharge on the basis of clemency; however, after considering the applicant's overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, the seriousness of the offenses of which convicted, and noting the lack of documentation pertaining to his post-service activities, we cannot conclude that clemency is warranted. In view of the above, we cannot recommend approval based on the current evidence of record. 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 AFBCMR BC-2013- 04408 in Executive Session on 7 August 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 August 2013, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 5 December 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 December 2013.