RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01174

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Bad Conduct discharge be upgraded to a General (Under 
Honorable Conditions).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was convicted of a misdemeanor offense which led to a Bad 
Conduct discharge.  The one year and five months of military 
service that led to his discharge does not depict the type of 
commitment he had for the first eight years of service.  He 
feels he received the most severe punishment by a newly 
appointed commanding officer as an example for others. 

He served eight years in the Air Force with above average 
evaluations.   Had his entire career been considered, he feels 
he would have only received nonjudicial punishment for a bad 
lapse in judgment.

In support of his request for clemency, the applicant submits 
five character letters from elective officials and 
businesspersons, all of whom have known him since being 
discharged.  He hopes that his commitment to be an honorable and 
productive member of his community will positively support his 
request.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 25 Feb 85, the applicant received an Article 15, Nonjudicial 
Punishment, for operating a vehicle while drunk.  He was ordered 
to forfeit $200.00 pay per month for two months. 

On 19 Jan 88, the applicant was found guilty by a Special Court 
Martial for larceny a violation of Article 121 of the Uniform 
Code of Military Justice.  He was sentenced to a Bad Conduct 
discharge, four months confinement, forfeiture of $438.00 pay 
per month for four months and reduction to the lowest enlisted 
grade.

On 9 Sep 88, the applicant was furnished a Bad Conduct 
discharge, and was credited with 8 years, 10 months, and 9 days 
of active service.   

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 there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  The application has not been 
submitted in a timely fashion.  After careful review of the 
record and the applicant’s submission, they do not believe there 
is any error or injustice with the court-martial process which 
would warrant changing the applicant’s approved court-martial 
sentence.

A complete copy of the 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 on 30 Sep 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 Title 10, United States Code, Section 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 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 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, we 
do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to 
conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities overcome 
the misconduct for which he was discharged. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought. 


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 Docket 
Number BC-2014-01174 in Executive Session on 16 Dec 14 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 25 Apr 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 14.