RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-00277

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His retirement grade be changed from technical sergeant (E-6) to master sergeant (E-7).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The requested relief is warranted because he has already paid for his misconduct after over 30 years of being ashamed of his misconduct.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 27 Jan 67.

On 23 Jun 83, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of one specification of making a false official statement, one specification of stealing housing and family separation allowances, and one specification of wrongfully, unlawfully, willfully, and knowingly using a false document in violation of Articles 107, 121, and 134 respectively, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  He was sentenced at a General Court-Martial to a BCD, reduction to the grade of sergeant (E-4) and forfeiture of $200 pay per month for 10 months.  

On 9 Sep 83, the convening authority approved the finding and sentence, except for the BCD which was suspended for 1 year unless sooner vacated, at which time it was remitted without further action.

In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court-marital conviction but may correct the record to reflect actions taken by reviewing authorities or take action on the sentence for purposes of clemency.
On 1 Feb 87, the applicant retired in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), and was credited with 20 years and 4 days of total active service.

On 27 Jan 97, he was advanced to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) on the USAF Retired List as he had completed a total of 30 years active service plus service on the retired list, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. Sections 8964 and 8992.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating the application is untimely.  Additionally, there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant’s request should be analyzed as a request for clemency regarding his court-martial sentence since his reduced rank stemmed from a court-martial conviction and he is not arguing that any personnel or other error occurred relating to his retirement grade.

The Board is authorized to take action on a court-martial for clemency purposes; however, such clemency is not warranted in this circumstance.  The applicant has not provided any evidence of injustice and although he had been selected for promotion to master sergeant (E-7), this selection occurred at the same time he was engaging in the misconduct that led to his court-martial, and he never actually served in the grade.  The applicant is currently receiving retirement pay at the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), the highest grade he had attained while on active duty.  Further advancing him to the grade of master sergeant (E-7) is not appropriate as an act of clemency.

A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denial indicating the applicant never served in the grade of master sergeant (E-7) and agree with AFLOA/JAJM that there is no evidence of an error or injustice to warrant clemency.  The applicant was considered and tentatively selected for promotion to master sergeant (E-7) during cycle 83A7 (promotions effective 1 Aug 82 – 1 Jul 83).  He received promotion sequence number (PSN) 6739.0 which would have incremented 1 Apr 83.  However, his promotion was placed in withhold IAW AFR 39-29, Promotion of Airmen, 28 Feb 79, Table 3 (under investigation/pending court-martial proceedings) for making a false official statement, stealing basic allowance for housing and family separation allowances, and using a false document to verify his entitlement to housing allowances.

Per General Court-Martial Order Number 29, dated 9 Sep 83, the applicant was sentenced to a BCD, reduction from technical sergeant (E-6) to sergeant (E-4), and forfeiture of $200 per month for 10 months.  The convening authority suspended the BCD.

The applicant was considered and selected for promotion to staff sergeant (E-5) during cycle 85B5 and retired in that grade effective 1 Feb 87 after 20 years and 4 days of active service.  On 27 Jan 97, he was advanced to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) on the retired list as he had completed a total of 30 years active service plus time on the retired list.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3SP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant clarifies that he is requesting his retirement grade be changed from technical sergeant (E-6) to master sergeant (E-7).  He also indicates that he was not aware of the three year time period to pursue this action.  Additionally, he states that he has no additional evidence in support of his request but as a reminder, he was the one to stop this criminal activity, albeit with a falsified divorce decree.

A complete copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, we find the application untimely.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-00277 in Executive Session on 11 May 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				    , Panel Chair
					   , Member
					  , Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-00277 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 18 Aug 16.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 9 Sep 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 Oct 16.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Oct 16, w/atchs.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.