RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05858 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to honorable. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her discharge was equitable [sic] because it was based on one isolated incident in 9 years of service with no other adverse action. The applicant provides no rationale as to why her failure to timely file should be waived in the interest of justice. In support of her request, she submits copies of her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and DD Forms 256 AF, Honorable Discharge Certificate. A copy of the applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 23 Mar 88, the applicant entered active duty. On 27 Feb 96, she was found guilty by general court-martial of wrongful use of cocaine on two separate occasions. She was sentenced to a BCD, 8 months confinement, forfeiture of $500 pay per month for 8 months and reduction to the grade of Airman Basic (AB, E-1). According to General Court-Martial Order, Number 5, dated 22 Apr 96, the court-martial convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged. According to General Court-Martial Order, Number 11, dated 14 Feb 97, the court-martial appeal authority affirmed the findings and sentence. On 5 Mar 97, the applicant was discharged with a BCD. She served 8 years, 11 months and 13 days on active duty. On 25 Apr 14, SAF/MRBR provided the applicant with an opportunity to submit information pertaining to her activities since leaving the service. As of this date this office has not received a response. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends the applicant’s request be denied. The application was received more than three years since the alleged error or injustice was discovered; therefore, the request is not timely. Based on the applicant’s submission, JAJM does not find any good reason for the Board to waive the time requirement and consider the application. Additionally, the relief the applicant seeks cannot be accomplished administratively; however, the Board has the authority to reduce the applicant’s court-martial sentence for purposes of clemency per 10 U.S.C. § 1552(f)(2). Based on JAJM’s review of the record, they see no error or injustice with the court-martial process that would warrant granting the applicant relief. The adjudged sentence was within the discretion of the court, it was approved by the convening authority and affirmed by the Air Force Court of Criminal Appeals. 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 25 Apr 14, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. ________________________________________________________________ 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 an error or injustice. We note that this Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial conviction. Rather, in accordance with 10 U.S.C § 1552(f), actions by this Board 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 her 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 Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted. However, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post-service activities that would enable us to determine if her accomplishments since her discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which she was discharged, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider 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 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-2013-05858 in Executive Session 9 Oct 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2013-05858 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Dec 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 28 Mar 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 14, w/atch.