RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-03046

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to General (under honorable conditions) or Honorable.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has paid for his mistakes over the last 10 years and deserves the ability to say he served honorably.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 22 Apr 99.

On 2 May 05, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of one specification of wrongfully using cocaine in violation of Article 112a, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  He was sentenced at a Special Court-Martial to a BCD, confinement for one month and reduction to the grade of airman (E-2).

On 24 May 05, the convening authority approved the finding and sentence, except for the BCD.

On 20 Sep 06, the United States Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals (AFCCA) affirmed the sentence and findings.

On 9 Apr 07, the appellate authority affirmed the sentence and the BCD was executed.

In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court-marital conviction but may only on the basis of clemency, correct the actions taken by the reviewing authorities, i.e., the sentence.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C and D.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2STM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Based on the documentation on file in the master personnel records, the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements.  This discharge was the result of a court-martial conviction and not the result of an administrative discharge where the other service characterizations such as Honorable, General, and Under Other Than Honorable Conditions (UOTHC) are normally utilized.

In accordance with the discharge instruction, drug abuse is “incompatible with military service and airmen who abuse drugs one or more times are subject to discharge for misconduct.”  The applicant’s case was adjudicated by the court and reviewed by the court of appeals for potential errors or prejudice and none were found.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP2STM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/JA recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) would have jurisdiction to act on the applicant’s request and would evaluate on the basis of clemency; however, it is doubtful that relief would be granted in that forum.  

The applicant pleaded guilty to wrongfully using cocaine on multiple occasions and was convicted on that basis.  A BCD is an authorized punishment in a special court martial for the offense. 
The applicant presents no evidence that his conviction or adjudged sentence was an error or an injustice nor does he provide any substantive or documentary information to support his request for relief.  He simply states that he has paid for his “mistake” and after 10 years “deserves the ability to say he has served honorably.”

The applicant has not carried his burden of showing that the sentence was unjust either at the time it was adjudged or ten years later.  Nor has the applicant provided any evidence of post-service conduct e.g., standing in community, employment, education, absence of criminal record, rehabilitation, family responsibility, etc. in support of his request.

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 May 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has not 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.  In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force.  As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction.  AFPC/JA has reviewed this application and indicated there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued.  In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at this level as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted.  Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that all available avenues of administrative relief have not been exhausted; and the application will only be reconsidered upon submission of documentary evidence indicating that said avenues of administrative relief have been exhausted.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03046 in Executive Session on 20 Sep 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

					 , Panel Chair
				  , Member
					   , Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03046 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jul 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 7 Jan 16.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/JA, dated 19 Jan 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 May 16.