RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03004 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His bad conduct discharge be upgraded to general, under honorable conditions. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He is remorseful for his youthful indiscretion. Since his discharge, he has led an exemplary life. In support of his request, the applicant, through his spouse, provides copies of his marriage documents, durable power of attorney for health care, letter from his attending physician, letters of character reference, DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, enlisted performance reports, as well as documents pertaining to a congressional inquiry in his behalf. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to documents extracted from his military personnel record, the applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who entered active duty on 8 February 1977. He served as a Communications-Computer Systems Operator and was progressively promoted to the grade of Staff Sergeant (SSgt), E-5. On 19 June 1989, the applicant was found guilty by a general court-martial for violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), Wrongful Use, Possession, etc., of Controlled Substances for specifications of wrongful possession, distribution, and use of cocaine. He pled guilty with exception to possession of cocaine and guilty to the other specifications and was found guilty of all specifications. His sentence was a bad conduct discharge, 24 months confinement, forfeiture of $150 pay per month for 24 months, and reduction to the grade of airman basic (AB) E-1. The confinement time was reduced to 20 months and the convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged on 19 June 1989. The applicant was released from active duty on 28 February 1990, with a bad conduct characterization of service and was credited with 12 years, 4 months and 10 days of active duty service. His grade at the time of release was Airman Basic, E-1, with an effective date of pay grade of 14 July 1989. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 1. AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant alleges no injustice and no error in the processing of the court-martial conviction against him. At his court-martial, the applicant pled guilty to and was found guilty of the charge. The applicant was represented by military counsel and was afforded every right to which he was he was entitled. 2. The applicant reportedly is suffering from Alzheimer's disease. His wife, the applicant's health care agent, submitted the application in behalf of her husband. She is asking that her husband's bad conduct discharge be upgraded because he has led an exemplary life since his discharge. She admits her husband made a very bad decision that he regrets. She states that he still tries to tell her how sorry he is for letting down both the service and his family. 3. Rules for Courts-Martial 1003(b), (8), (C), states that a bad conduct discharge “is designed as punishment for bad conduct.” It also indicates that a bad conduct discharge is more than merely a service characterization; it is a punishment for the crimes the applicant committed while a member of the armed forces. The applicant’s sentence to a bad conduct discharge was well within legal limits. The complete AFLOA/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, by way of his wife, on 15 October 2013, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). To date, a response has not been received. ________________________________________________________________ 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 took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Military Justice Division and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The applicant's discharge was based on his trial and conviction by a general court-martial. Evidence has not been provided to show that the applicant's discharge was erroneous or unjust. While we are precluded by law from reversing a court-martial conviction, we are authorized to correct the records to reflect actions taken by reviewing officials and to take action on the sentence of a military court based on clemency. Notwithstanding his otherwise good service record, in view of the seriousness of the misconduct he committed (i.e., the possession, distribution and use of illegal substances), there is nothing in the available record which would cause us to disturb the actions of the reviewing officials in this case. Therefore, 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 this application in Executive Session on 11 March 2014 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03004 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 June 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 19 September 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 October 2013. 1 2