RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02093 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to honorable or general. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not derelict in the performance of his duties and did not understand the potential hazards of his court-martial. He did not understand that he could have representation or counsel to assist him in the court-marital. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 15 Nov 54. On 4 Sep 56, the applicant was found guilty, contrary to his plea, at a summary Court-Martial for insubordination and failure to obey an order in violation of Articles 91 and 92, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). He was sentenced to forfeit $25.00. On 17 Dec 56, the applicant was found guilty, contrary to his plea, at a special Court-Martial for absenting himself from his organization without proper authority and breach of arrest or escape in violation of Articles 86 and 95, UCMJ. He was sentenced to forfeitures of pay of $65.00 per month for three months, and confinement at hard labor for three months. On 18 Feb 57, the convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged. On 26 Apr 57, the applicant was furnished an UOTHC discharge and was credited with 1 year, 11 months, and 12 days of active service. On 31 Jul 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). 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 D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The punishment adjudged and approved by the convening authority was within the range of permissible punishments. In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court-martial conviction but may only on the basis of clemency, correct the actions taken by the reviewing authorities, i.e., the sentence. To upgrade the applicant’s discharge now would require the Board to substitute its judgment for that rendered by the command over 50 years ago when the facts and circumstances were fresh. Not only was the applicant found guilty of multiple offenses at two different court-martials, his sentence was then approved by the convening authority, which sentences eventually led to his discharge. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 24 Nov 14 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 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 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, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post- service activities that would enable us to determine if his accomplishments since his discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2014-02093 in Executive Session on 29 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02093 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 May 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jul 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 29 Oct 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Nov 14.