RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02179 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to Honorable. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of her court-martial, she was not indebted to the bank and the bank did not want to press charges. Her First Sergeant made it personal and pursued pressing charges because of their indifferences. . The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, on 16 Dec 87, she entered the Regular Air Force. On 18 Jan 94, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of six specifications of making, drawing, or uttering a check, draft, or order without sufficient funds in violation of Article 123a, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) and was sentenced at a Special Court-Martial to a BCD and reduction to the grade of airman (E-1). On 10 Mar 94, the convening authority approved the finding and sentence, except for the BCD. On 26 Jan 95, the appellate authority affirmed the sentence and on the BCD was executed. On 13 Feb 95, the applicant received a BCD, and was credited with 7 years, 1 month, and 28 days of total active service. On 7 Aug 15, 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 D). AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denying the applicant’s request due to untimeliness or on its merits indicating, the applicant has not provided any evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant alleges she should be granted clemency because the bank never filed charges and her commander disliked her for no reason. However, she did not provide any evidence that was not available at the time of trial or post-trial clemency. The applicant’s punishment was within the range of permissible punishments and there is no evidence or claim that the applicant was not afforded all of her appellate rights. 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 18 Sep 15 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 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 took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, as noted by JAJM, there is no evidence of an error or injustice that occurred in the discharge processing. Based on the available evidence of record it appears the discharge was consistent with the substantive requirements of the discharge regulation and within the commander's discretionary authority. The applicant has provided no evidence which would lead us to believe the characterization of the service was contrary to the provisions of the governing regulation, unduly harsh, or disproportionate to the offenses committed. In the interest of justice, we considered upgrading the discharge based on clemency. However, we do not find the evidence presented is sufficient for us to conclude that the applicant’s post-service activities warrant granting the relief sought. 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-2014-02179 in Executive Session on 29 Oct 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 May 14, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 23 Jul 15. Exhibit D. Email, SAF/MRBRC, dated 18 Sep 15.